MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409493807 · doi:10.1021/acs.langmuir.5c00144

Investigating the Competitive Adsorption of Polymer-Bisphosphonate Ligands on Lanthanide Nanoparticles

2025· article· en· W4409493807 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahtab Abtahi, Edmond C. N. Wong, Yang Liu, Mitchell A. Winnik

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLanthanideAdsorptionNanoparticleChemistryPolymerChemical engineeringNanotechnologyInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the binding of five “stealth” polymers to the surface of NaYF 4:Yb,Er NPs with diameters of 20 and 24 nm. All polymers had a neridronate (Ner) end group that provided a bisphosphonate to promote strong binding to the lanthanide NP (LnNP) surface. The polymers included four poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) samples with M n = 2000 and 5000 and a zwitterionic poly(sulfobetaine methacrylate) (PSBMA, DP = 35). At surface saturation, the polymers had densities ranging from 2.3 to 3.8 nm 2 /polymer, and all provided excellent colloidal stability in PBS buffer. Ligand exchange experiments for samples aged 24 h after treatment with the first polymer ligand showed that PEG-Ner was more effective at displacing PSBMA-Ner than the reverse reaction. One surprising result is that PEG-Ner polymers with a distal azide group bound to the nanoparticles (NPs) at higher surface density than the corresponding methoxy-PEG polymers. Another set of surprising results is that when methoxy-PEG-Ner samples competed with PSBMA-Ner, more PSBMA than PEG became bound to the surface. However, when the azide-PEG-Ner samples competed with PSBMA-Ner, more PEG than PSBMA became bound to the surface.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicLanthanide and Transition Metal ComplexesFrench-language works237,207