MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040332509 · doi:10.3390/s130708188

Rapid Detection of Viable Microorganisms Based on a Plate Count Technique Using Arrayed Microelectrodes

2013· article· en· W2040332509 on OpenAlexafffund
Avneet Bajwa, S. T. Tan, R. K. Mehta, Behraad Bahreyni

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityPBR LaboratoriesAlberta Health Services
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrosystemBiochipBiosensorMicroelectrodeFood microbiologyMiniaturizationAgar plateAgarMaterials scienceNanotechnologyBacteriaBiologyChemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of a miniaturized biosensor system that can be used for rapid detection and counting of microorganisms in food or water samples is described. The developed microsystem employs a highly sensitive impedimetric array of biosensors to monitor the growth of bacterial colonies that are dispersed across an agar growth medium. To use the system, a sample containing the bacteria is cultured above the agar layer. Using a multiplexing network, the electrical properties of the medium at different locations are continuously measured, recorded, and compared against a baseline signal. Variations of signals from different biosensors are used to reveal the presence of bacteria in the sample, as well as the locations of bacterial colonies across the biochip. This technique forms the basis for a label-free bacterial detection for rapid analysis of food samples, reducing the detection time by at least a factor of four compared to the current required incubation times of 24 to 72 hours for plate count techniques. The developed microsystem has the potential for miniaturization to a stage where it could be deployed for rapid analysis of food samples at commercial scale at laboratories, food processing facilities, and retailers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207