MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990743379 · doi:10.1063/1.4795273

Modeling the motion and detection of particles in microcantilever sensor cells

2013· article· en· W1990743379 on OpenAlexafffund
K. Y. Manning, Naveed Razzaq Butt, Abdullah N. Alodhayb, Ivan Saika‐Voivod, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCantileverLaminar flowLeverCalibrationMechanicsParticle (ecology)Materials scienceFlow (mathematics)Biological systemVolumetric flow rateNanotechnologyPhysicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consideration of the dynamics of the liquid is often neglected in experiments carried out in flow-through microcantilever sensor cells. Thus, fluid dynamics simulations were performed showing that the geometry of the sensor cell and laminar nature of the flow may result in a highly uneven distribution of particulates throughout the cell, and hence an uneven detection rate at individual cantilevers in a multi-lever setup. Various strategies for diverting flow were tested in order to optimize particle capture rates. Additionally, DNA detection experiments were performed that validated our approximations in treating particle-cantilever interactions and provided a semi-quantitative relationship between simulated particle detection and actual cantilever deflections. The results point out the advantages of flow optimization, the need for calibration of individual cantilevers within a multi-lever cell, and the usefulness of simulation in achieving these goals.

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 score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207