MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126456776 · doi:10.1002/jmr.974

Second international <i>AFM BioMed Conference</i> on AFM in life sciences and medicine, 16–18 October 2008, Monterey, CA, USA

2009· editorial· en· W2126456776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sanjay Kumar, Pierre Parot, Jean‐Luc Pellequer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Recognition · 2009
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnthusiasmAtomic force microscopySession (web analytics)Library scienceNanotechnologyEngineeringPsychologyComputer scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Founded in June 2006, AFM BioMed organized its first international conference from 19 to 21 April 2007 in Barcelona (Pellequer et al., 2007). Hosted by Universitat de Barcelona, IBEC1 and the CEA,2 this event welcomed approximately 220 scientists from 24 countries reflecting the strong and rapidly growing enthusiasm for the use of AFM in the life sciences and medicine (Parot et al., 2007). The second edition, held at the Hyatt Regency in Monterey, California, from 16 to 18 October 2008, was hosted by QB33 and CEA with an organizing committee of Sanjay Kumar (Chairman: UC, Berkeley), Pierre Parot and Jean-Luc Pellequer (Co-organizers: CEA Marcoule). Conferences like these are simply not possible without extensive financial and logistical support, and Veeco Instruments, Hamamatsu, Microscopy and Analysis, Leica Microsystems and nPoint offered generous sponsorship to help cover both scientific and social events. Approximately 150 scientists from 16 countries attended the Monterey edition of AFM BioMed which was organized into five full-length oral sessions, two poster sessions and an evening session featuring short oral presentations of a few particularly outstanding posters. In addition to these sessions, a workshop was held the day before the conference that included lectures and demonstrations covering various applications of AFM in the life sciences ranging from single molecules to living cells. Examples included AFM imaging and force spectroscopy of biomolecules and cells, mechanical characterization of biological materials and micromanipulation. The first oral session, New AFM-Based Instrumentation for Biology and Medicine, was chaired by Daniel Fletcher (University of California, Berkeley, USA) and covered novel force microscopy techniques, combined AFM-optical microscopy systems and advanced probes. The second session, Biomolecular Force Spectroscopy, was chaired by Christopher Yip (University of Toronto, Canada) and covered single-molecule force spectroscopy, mechanical unfolding, simulation and analysis of single molecule unfolding and refolding and measurement of protein–protein and protein–surface interactions, including adhesive and receptor–ligand binding forces. The third session, AFM of Biomaterial Surfaces, was chaired by Greg Haugstad (University of Minnesota, USA) and covered imaging and chemical/mechanical characterization of biomaterial surfaces (particularly in the context of coating, adsorption and modification) and the interface of synthetic materials with biological tissues. The fourth session, AFM of Cells, was chaired by Michel Grandbois (Université de Sherbrooke, Canada) and covered the force spectroscopy, adhesion, imaging, mechanics and mechanotransduction and manipulation of living cells. The final session, Biomolecular Imaging, was chaired by Simon Scheuring (Institut Curie, France) and covered high-resolution AFM imaging of biomolecules, biomembranes, cells and biomedical nanostructures. This special issue of JMR is dedicated to showcasing full-length papers based on some of the especially superb presentations made at the meeting. To pick just a few examples, Strauss and colleagues use AFM to comparatively characterize the structure and force spectroscopy of the lipopolysaccharide (LPS) layer across several E. coli strains and show that the length of the LPS layer correlates with adhesion to the AFM tip, which may lend insights into the earliest steps of infection. Jungbauer and colleagues creatively use AFM imaging to validate new strategies for fluorescently labelling Aβ amyloid fibrils, thereby creating new reagents for studying cellular and molecular mechanisms of Alzheimer's disease. Calderon and colleagues develop an elegant modelling framework with which to extract information about intramolecular frictional interactions from single-molecule unfolding experiments. We are excited to report that there will be a third edition of AFM BioMed, with the meeting once again returning to Europe. The next AFM BioMed conference will be held from 10 to 15 May 2010, in Red Island (Roving, Croatia) and will be chaired by Professor Vesna Svetličić from the Ruđer Bošković Institute at Zagreb, Croatia. We are confident that you will enjoy this special issue of JMR, and we hope to see you in Red Island!

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1270.051

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular RecognitionSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207