Multiplexed and microparticle‐based analyses: Quantitative tools for the large‐scale analysis of biological systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the term flow cytometry refers to the measurement of cells, the approach of making sensitive multiparameter optical measurements in a flowing sample stream is a very general analytical approach. The past few years have seen an explosion in the application of flow cytometry technology for molecular analysis and measurements using microparticles as solid supports. While microsphere-based molecular analyses using flow cytometry date back three decades, the need for highly parallel quantitative molecular measurements that has arisen from various genomic and proteomic advances has driven the development in particle encoding technology to enable highly multiplexed assays. Multiplexed particle-based immunoassays are now common place, and new assays to study genes, protein function, and molecular assembly. Numerous efforts are underway to extend the multiplexing capabilities of microparticle-based assays through new approaches to particle encoding and analyte reporting. The impact of these developments will be seen in the basic research and clinical laboratories, as well as in drug development.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it