MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099360393 · doi:10.1002/chem.201500949

Patterned Paper Sensors Printed with Long‐Chain DNA Aptamers

2015· article· en· W2099360393 on OpenAlexafffund
Carmen Carrasquilla, Jessamyn R. L. Little, Yingfu Li, John D. Brennan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAptamer3d printedDNANanotechnologyComputational biologyComputer scienceEngineeringBiologyMaterials scienceGeneticsBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing interest in developing printable paper sensors to enable rapid testing of analytes for environmental, food safety, and clinical applications. A major challenge is to find suitable bioinks that are amenable to high-speed printing and remain functional after printing. We report on a simple and effective approach wherein an aqueous ink composed of megadalton-sized tandem repeating structure-switching DNA aptamers (concatemeric aptamers) is used to rapidly create patterned paper sensors on filter paper by inkjet printing. These concatemeric aptamer reporters remain immobilized at the point of printing through strong adsorption but retain sufficient segmental mobility to undergo structure switching and fluorescence signaling to provide both qualitative and quantitative detection of small molecules and protein targets. The convenience of inkjet printing allows for the patterning of internally referenced sensors with multiplexed detection, and provides a generic platform for on-demand printing of sensors even in remote locations.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.181
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations76
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207