Mechanical characterization of polymeric microcapsules using a force-feedback MEMS microgripper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports a monolithic, force-feedback MEMS (microelectomechanical systems) microgripper and its application to micro-scale compression testing of swollen hydrogel microcapsules during manipulation in an aqueous environment. The single-chip microgripper uses an electrothermal microactuator for grasping and integrates two capacitive force sensors, one for contact detection (force resolution: 38.5nN) and the other for gripping force measurements (force resolution: 19.9nN). Using the force-feedback microgripper and a mechanics model for assessing large deformation data, the system with a 19.9nN force resolution and a 20.5nm resolution for material deformation measurement quantified Young's modulus values of individual alginate microcapsules (15-25microm) with 1%, 2%, and 3% chitosan coating, demonstrating an easy-to-operate, accurate compression testing technique for mechanically characterizing soft, micrometer-sized biomaterials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".