MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1888499811 · doi:10.1002/adhm.201500492

Hydrogel Templates for Rapid Manufacturing of Bioactive Fibers and 3D Constructs

2015· article· en· W1888499811 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Tamayol, Alireza Hassani Najafabadi, Bahar Aliakbarian, Elmira Arab‐Tehrany, Mohsen Akbari, Nasim Annabi, David Juncker, Ali Khademhosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Healthcare Materials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation CentreMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGenome CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsNational Institutes of HealthCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsTemplateComputer sciencePolymer networkProcess (computing)TextilePolymerFiberNanotechnologyMaterials scienceSelf-healing hydrogelsPolymer scienceComposite materialPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogel templates are formed to entrap various pre-polymers prior to their crosslinking process. Upon the completion of the crosslinking process, an independent polymer network with the same fiber geometry is formed. The hydrogel template can be removed if necessary. As the proof-of-principle, fibers from various polymers are fabricated. The fabricated hybrid polymeric fibers are bioactive and can be bioprinted or assembled using textile processes. The approach can be used for creating complex 3D constructs for various applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations143
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Healthcare MaterialsSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207