A new hand-held microfluidic cytometer for evaluating irradiation damage by analysis of the damaged cells distribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Space radiation brings uneven damages to cells. The detection of the distribution of cell damage plays a very important role in radiation medicine and the related research. In this paper, a new hand-held microfluidic flow cytometer was developed to evaluate the degree of radiation damage of cells. The device we propose overcomes the shortcomings (e.g., large volume and high cost) of commercial flow cytometers and can evaluate the radiation damage of cells accurately and quickly with potential for onsite applications. The distribution of radiation-damaged cells is analyzed by a simultaneous detection of immunofluorescence intensity of γ-H2AX and resistance pulse sensor (RPS) signal. The γ-H2AX fluorescence intensity provides information of the degree of radiation damage in cells. The ratio of the number of cells with γ-H2AX fluorescence signals to the total numbers of cells detected by RPS indicates the percentage of the cells that are damaged by radiation. The comparison experiment between the developed hand-held microfluidic flow cytometer and a commercial confocal microscope indicates a consistent and comparable detection performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".