MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254640665 · doi:10.1038/srep10274

A biochemical network can control formation of a synthetic material by sensing numerous specific stimuli

2015· article· en· W2254640665 on OpenAlexafffund
Ju Hun Yeon, Karen Y. T. Chan, Ting-Chia Wong, K. Chan, Michael R. Sutherland, Rustem F. Ismagilov, Edward L.G. Pryzdial, Christian J. Kastrup

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in Materials
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational biologyControl (management)Data scienceArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing bio-compatible smart materials that assemble in response to environmental cues requires strategies that can discriminate multiple specific stimuli in a complex milieu. Synthetic materials have yet to achieve this level of sensitivity, which would emulate the highly evolved and tailored reaction networks of complex biological systems. Here we show that the output of a naturally occurring network can be replaced with a synthetic material. Exploiting the blood coagulation system as an exquisite biological sensor, the fibrin clot end-product was replaced with a synthetic material under the biological control of a precisely regulated cross-linking enzyme. The functions of the coagulation network remained intact when the material was incorporated. Clot-like polymerization was induced in indirect response to distinct small molecules, phospholipids, enzymes, cells, viruses, an inorganic solid, a polyphenol, a polysaccharide, and a membrane protein. This strategy demonstrates for the first time that an existing stimulus-responsive biological network can be used to control the formation of a synthetic material by diverse classes of physiological triggers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in MaterialsFrench-language works237,207