Recent advances in microfluidic actuation and micro-object manipulation via surface acoustic waves
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The realization of microscale total analysis systems and lab-on-a-chip technologies requires efficient actuation (mixing, pumping, atomizing, nebulizing, driving, etc.) of fluids on the microscopic scale and dexterous manipulation (separation, sorting, trapping, concentration, merging, patterning, aligning, focusing, etc.) of micro-objects (cells, droplets, particles, nanotubes, etc.) in open (sessile droplets) as well as confined spaces (microchannels/chambers). These capabilities have been recently achieved using powerful acoustofluidic techniques based on high-frequency (10-1000 MHz) surface acoustic waves (SAWs). SAW-based miniaturized microfluidic devices are best known for their non-invasive properties, low costs, and ability to manipulate micro-objects in a label-free manner. The energy-efficient SAWs are also compatible with conventional microfabrication technologies. The present work critically analyses recent reports describing the use of SAWs in microfluidic actuation and micro-object manipulation. Acoustofluidic techniques may be categorized according to the use of travelling SAWs (TSAWs) or standing SAWs (SSAWs). TSAWs are used to actuate fluids and manipulate micro-objects via acoustic streaming flow (ASF) as well as acoustic radiation force (ARF). SSAWs are mainly used for micro-object manipulation and are rarely employed for microfluidic actuation. We have reviewed reports of new technological developments that have not been covered in other recent reviews. In the end, we describe the future prospects of SAW-based acoustofluidic technologies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it