MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An evaluation of the detection limits possible for competitive capillary electrophoretic immunoassays

2001· article· en· W2057032815 on OpenAlexaff
Justine Taylor, Gilles Picelli, D. Jed Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetection limitCapillary electrophoresisElectrophoresisCapillary actionLimit (mathematics)ChromatographyImmunoassayChemistryBiological systemAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ThermodynamicsAntibodyMathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a high-affinity antibody for estradiol, thermodynamic and experimental limitations on detection limits for competitive capillary electrophoretic immunoassays were examined. Theoretical modeling of the dose-response curves for such assays allowed for optimization of experimental conditions. Through the examination of experimental and theoretical results generalizations could be made as to the ability of capillary electrophoretic immunoassays to achieve low detection limits. An experimental detection limit of 310 pM, corresponding to 2100 molecules, was achieved. A minimum theoretical detection limit for the antibody of interest was approximated to be 125-525 pM depending on the standard deviation. An overview of the optimization process is given as well as commentary on theoretical predictions.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207