Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a concept for rapid generation of tunable, shear-free, mobile gradients in open space which we define as floating gradient. A microfluidic probe with 4 apertures arranged at the corners of a virtual square, two for injecting fluids and two for aspiration. The simultaneous injection from two apertures results to a head-to-head flow at the center of the MFP, and the formation of a stagnation point, while aspiration by the two other apertures results in hydrodynamic confinement of the injected streams, forming a quadrupole-like microfluidic field. The two injected streams are the source and sink, respectively, and a gradient is formed across the shear-free, stagnation point. We show that the gradient is formed rapidly, can be tuned by changing the aspiration flow rate, and can be moved either hydrodynamically by changing the flow ratio between the two aspiration apertures and/or two injection apertures, or can be moved by physically displacing the microfluidic probe. We expect the floating gradient concept to be useful for surface patterning and cell studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".