MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974771539 · doi:10.3390/v6093458

A Filtration Based Technique for Simultaneous SEM and TEM Sample Preparation for the Rapid Detection of Pathogens

2014· article· en· W1974771539 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel R. Beniac, Christine G Siemens, Christine J. Wright, Tim Booth

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFiltration (mathematics)ChromatographySample preparationLimitingSize-exclusion chromatographyAdsorptionSample (material)VirusMaterials scienceChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)NanotechnologyBiologyVirologyMathematicsStatisticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnostic electron microscopy for infectious diseases has the advantage that "everything" in the specimen can be observed, without a priori knowledge of the likely identity of the microorganisms present in the sample. The classical specimen preparation method used employs a droplet of sample, which allows particles to adsorb to a support film, and is subsequently negative stained. This "grid on drop" procedure has a sensitivity range of approximately 106 viruses per mL if no enrichment procedures are used. In the current investigation we present a novel use of filtration that allows us to detect viruses at concentrations as low as 102 viruses per mL. We present here methods based on filtration, in which total virus, and not virus concentration, is the limiting factor for detection. We show that filtration is more sensitive than conventional negative staining and can detect as few as 5 × 103 particles per sample.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations33
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207