MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2026044127 · doi:10.1109/nano.2011.6144290

Modeling errors in synthesized tile sets for template manufacturing by DNA self-assembly

2011· article· en· W2026044127 on OpenAlexaff
X. Ma, Masoud Hashempour, Ji Han, Fabrizio Lombardi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTileAggregate (composite)Closing (real estate)Computer scienceCardinality (data modeling)Set (abstract data type)AlgorithmMarkov chainMaterials scienceData miningNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a detailed analytical framework for errors in DNA self-assembly using synthesized tile sets for template manufacturing. Previous works have shown that due to the smaller cardinality of the employed tile set, a synthesized aggregate has a higher (lower) error rate than a non-synthesized aggregate at high (low) tile concentration; moreover, in the former type of aggregate errors are clustered rather than random. Two novel phenomena referred to as propagation and closing are considered in detail and the analysis of this paper shows that the reported difference in errors between aggregates is caused by these phenomena. A new Markov model is presented and solved; this model confirms that, as reported in the technical literature, a cluster of erroneous tiles is more likely to be generated in a synthesized aggregate with a slower growth speed than the error-free aggregate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques→French-language works237,207→