MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995520382 · doi:10.1364/oe.7.000533

Analysis of the behaviour of erythrocytes in an optical trapping system

2000· article· en· W1995520382 on OpenAlexaff
S.C. Grover, Robert C. Gauthier, André G. Skirtach

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrbital Angular Momentum in Optics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaLaurentian UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical tweezersTrappingOptical forceSortingOpticsTorqueOrientation (vector space)Beam (structure)PhysicsTrap (plumbing)Optical axisMaterials scienceComputer scienceMathematicsThermodynamicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a theoretical analysis of the behaviour of erythrocytes in an optical trapping system. We modeled erythrocyte behaviour in an optical trap by an algorithm which divided the cell surface into a large number of elements and recursively summed the force and torque on each element. We present a relationship between the torque and angle of orientation of the cell, showing that stable equilibrium orientations are at angles of 0 o , 180 o and 360 o and unstable equilibrium orientations are at 90 o and 270 o relative to the axis of beam propagation. This is consistent with our experimental observations and with results described in the literature. We also model behaviour of the erythrocyte during micromanipulation by calculating the net force on it. Such theoretical analysis is practical as it allows for the optimization of the optical parameters of a trapping system prior to performing a specific optical micromanipulation application, such as cell sorting or construction of a cell pattern for lab-on-a-chip 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations76
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicOrbital Angular Momentum in OpticsFrench-language works237,207