MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026655499 · doi:10.1149/2.023402jes

A Review of Magnetic Composite Polymers Applied to Microfluidic Devices

2014· review· en· W2026655499 on OpenAlexaff
Bonnie L. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofabricationMicrofluidicsNanotechnologyMaterials sciencePolymerPhotolithographyMagnetic nanoparticlesLab-on-a-chipComposite numberFabricationComposite materialNanoparticle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many researchers have demonstrated microfluidic devices based on magnetic forces; however, the widespread deployment of magnetic microfluidic devices has been slowed by issues of difficult microfabrication and integration of magnetic materials with polymer materials that are often employed for microfluidics. Relatively new advances in magnetic composite polymers (M-CPs) may offer solutions to these problems. Polymer materials have been demonstrated that can be micropatterned using conventional microfabrication methods such as photolithography or micromolding, but are rendered magnetic through the introduction of micro- or nano- particles into the polymer matrix. These materials retain many of the matrix polymer's characteristics and remain compatible with their un-doped polymer base. Softly-magnetic nanocomposite polymers are sufficient for many applications, such as uni-directional actuators involving microstructure attraction. However, hard-magnetic composite polymers can be permanently polarized, and find applications in areas such as bi-directional actuation or bead capture and orientation. This critical review provides an introduction to magnetics as applied to M-CPs, and discusses the application of M-CPs to various microfluidic devices and applications, including fluid manipulation devices; interconnects and assembly aids; and movable devices for, e.g., cell-culture. We further discuss the potential outlook for magnetic-composite-polymer-driven technological advances in the fields of microfluidics and labs-on-a-chip (LOC).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations71
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207