MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2235479505 · doi:10.4271/2001-01-2229

Space Life Support from the Cellular Perspective

2001· article· en· W2235479505 on OpenAlexaff
N. D. Searby, J. Vandendriesche, Cindy Havens, Frances M.Nc Donovan, Javier Luis, Stephan Pretorius, J. Lagaz, Liping Sun, L. Kundakovic, Carmen Preda, I. Berzin, Gordana Vunjak‐Novakovic

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Space (punctuation)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the fundamental role of gravity in vital biological systems in space is one of six science and research areas that provides the philosophical underpinning for why NASA exists. The study of cells, tissues, and microorganisms in a spaceflight environment holds the promise of answering multiple intriguing questions about how gravity affects living systems. To enable these studies, specimens must be maintained in an environment similar to that used in a laboratory. Cell culture studies under normal laboratory conditions involve maintaining a highly specialized environment with the necessary temperature, humidity control, nutrient, and gas exchange conditions. These same cell life support conditions must be provided by the International Space Station (ISS) Cell Culture Unit (CCU) in the unique environment of space. The CCU is a perfusion-based system that must function in microgravity, at unit gravity (1g) on earth, and from 0.1g up to 2g aboard the ISS centrifuge rotor. One of the biggest challenges is to optimize the flow environment within the cell specimen chamber to meet the complex and often conflicting requirements to provide uniform gas and nutrient exchange, to maintain cell suspension, and to control hydrodynamic stresses acting on the adherent or suspended cells. Other challenges include obtaining representative samples of cells and culture medium, managing any bubbles formed in the cell specimen chamber and fluid lines, preventing blockage of the cell separation membrane inside the chamber, and providing sterile containment during all experiment phases. Flight studies of cells and tissues also require the development of proper control experiments for specific parameters in the cell culture environment. Thorough ground testing is currently being carried out in development hardware called the Science Evaluation Units. We present data from our experiments using animal, plant, and microbial cells where we have optimized these life support conditions.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.005

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207