MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visual Sensing Platform for Quantitative Analysis of Water Contaminants

2025· article· W7124874959 on OpenAlexaff
Muersha Wusiman, Fariborz Taghipour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)ContaminationEnvironmental monitoringQuantum dotWater qualityAdaptabilityFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a growing, unmet demand for real-time, frequent monitoring of water quality across various sectors, including drinking water, wastewater, agriculture, and aquaculture. To address this need, we developed a rapid, image-based water quality sensor that shifts traditional, time-consuming, and costly laboratory analysis to on-site detection of contaminants. In this first-of-its-kind study, we introduced a solid-phase fluorescence sensing platform for detecting chemical contaminants in water. The sensor integrates zinc oxide (ZnO) quantum dots (QDs) with molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) to create a fluorescence-responsive material. Upon UV activation, the fluorescence emission from the sensing layer is quenched in the presence of target contaminants, which absorb the excited-state energy of the emissive electrons. Contaminant concentrations were estimated by analyzing the color intensity of captured images using a portable fluorescence detector. The platform was tested with 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and the algal toxin Microcystin-LR (MCLR) as model contaminants, demonstrating high sensitivity and adaptability to different targets. We further investigated the sensor's working mechanism, identifying key parameters for expanding its use to a broader range of contaminants. Results confirmed the sensor's strong sensitivity and selectivity, highlighting its potential for developing portable, UV-LED-activated detection systems. The platform's high sensitivity, specificity, target flexibility, and user-friendly design lay the foundation for future lab-on-a-chip, image-based sensing technologies for environmental monitoring.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207