Highly selective biomechanical separation of cancer cells from leukocytes using microfluidic ratchets and hydrodynamic concentrator
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
The separation of cells based on their biomechanical properties, such as size and deformability, is important in applications such as the identification of circulating tumor cells, where morphological differences can be used to distinguish target cancer cells from contaminant leukocytes. Existing filtration-based separation processes are limited in their selectivity and their ability to extract the separated cells because of clogging in the filter microstructures. We present a cell separation device consisting of a hydrodynamic concentrator and a microfluidic ratchet mechanism operating in tandem. The hydrodynamic concentrator removes the majority of the fluid and a fraction of leukocytes based on size, while the microfluidic ratchet mechanism separates cancer cells from leukocytes based on a combination of size and deformability. The irreversible ratcheting process enables highly selective separation and robust extraction of separated cells. Using cancer cells spiked into leukocyte suspensions, the complete system demonstrated a yield of 97%, while enriching the concentration of target cancer cells 3000 fold relative to the concentration of leukocytes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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