MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071702994 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2014.0487

Development of a microfluidic device with integrated high frequency ultrasound probe for particle characterization

2014· article· en· W2071702994 on OpenAlexaff
Eric M. Strohm, Michael C. Kolios, Dae Kun Hwang, Byeong‐Ui Moon, Scott Tsai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrasoundParticle (ecology)TransducerMaterials scienceMicrofluidicsAcousticsParticle sizeSIGNAL (programming language)Ultrasonic sensorSpeed of soundWavelengthAcoustic wavePolystyreneNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsPhysicsChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A microfluidic flow device incorporating a 200 MHz ultrasound probe has been developed to rapidly characterize micron-sized particles. The device hydrodynamically focuses a particle stream under the ultrasound transducer, where pulse-echo ultrasound is used to probe the passing particles one by one. When the ultrasound wavelength is similar to the particle size, the scattered wave depends strongly on the particle size, and the sound speed and density of the particle and surrounding fluid. Each particle type and size has a unique acoustic signature from which it can be identified. To demonstrate this, polystyrene microbeads with two different sizes were used, 6 or 10 μm. Each particle produced an ultrasound signal, and it was identified as either 6 or 10 μm according to unique features in the ultrasound power spectrum. The ultrasound spectral features agreed with those measured from stationary beads using an acoustic microscope, and also to theoretical predictions. These results show for the first time, a new high-speed method of characterizing micron-sized particles using sound waves with applications towards classifying biological cells.

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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207