MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2077980692 · doi:10.1117/12.2083632

SPR-MS: from identifying adsorbed molecules to image tissues

2015· article· en· W2077980692 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Masson, Julien Breault-Turcot, Simon Forest, Pierre Chaurand

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomoleculeAdsorptionSurface plasmon resonanceChemistryLysisMonolayerProtein adsorptionNanotechnologyMass spectrometryChromatographyMoleculeBiosensorMaterials scienceBiochemistryNanoparticleOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) sensors have become valuable analytical sensors for biomolecule detection. While SPR is heralded with high sensitivity, label-free and real-time detection, nonspecific adsorption and detection of ultralow concentrations remain issues. Nonspecific adsorption can be minimized using adequate surface chemistry. For example, we have employed peptide monolayers to reduce nonspecific adsorption of crude serum or cell lysate. It is important to uncover the nature of molecules nonspecifically adsorbing to surfaces in these biofluids, to further improve understanding of the nonspecific adsorption processes. Mass spectrometry (MS) provides a complementary tool to SPR to identify biomolecule adsorbed to surface. Trypsic digestion of the proteins adsorbed to surfaces led to identification of characteristic peptides from the proteins involved in nonspecific adsorption. Nonspecific adsorption in crude cell lysate results mainly from lipids, as confirmed with SPR and MS but proteins were observed on some surfaces. In another application of SPR and MS, imaging SPR can be used in combination to imaging MS to image tissue sections. Thin sections of mouse liver were inserted in the fluidic chamber of a SPRi instrument and proteins were transferred to the SPRi chip. The SPR chip was then imaged using MALDI imaging MS to identify the biomolecules that were transferred to the SPRi chip.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques→French-language works237,207→