MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2181797992 · doi:10.21307/ijssis-2017-756

Characterization of a Needle-Type Giant Magnetoresistance Sensor for Detection of Escherichia Coli’S Magnetic Marker

2015· article· en· W2181797992 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Shirzadfar, Mustapha Nadi, Djilali Kourtiche, Sotoshi Yamada, Payman Shahabi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Smart Sensing and Intelligent Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGiant magnetoresistanceSuperparamagnetismMaterials scienceEscherichia coliNanotechnologyFocus (optics)Characterization (materials science)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMagnetoresistanceMagnetic fieldComputer scienceChemistryPhysicsMagnetizationOpticsArtificial intelligenceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the recent years, the introduction and development of simple and portable sensors has been the focus of researchers in nearly all scientific domains, particularly in the biomedical settings. Giant magnetoresistance (GMR) provides a cutting-edge sensor technology. The GMR-based sensors are capable to affordably and sensitively detect and quantify micro- and nano-magnetic particles, even in very weak magnetic fields. In this paper, we introduce a highly sensitive needle-type GMR-based sensor, designed for the identification and quantification of Escherichia coli O157:H7 bacteria covered by superparamagnetic beads, Dynabeads® MAX E.coli O157. The sensor characteristics, measurement system setup and the properties of the magnetic marker solution are discussed in detail.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Smart Sensing and Intelligent SystemsSame topicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207