MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342801116 · doi:10.1021/acscombsci.5b00180

Design of a Microfluidic Chip for Magnetic-Activated Sorting of One-Bead-One-Compound Libraries

2016· article· en· W2342801116 on OpenAlexafffund
Choi‐Fong Cho, Kyungheon Lee, Maria C. Speranza, Fernanda C. Bononi, Mariano S. Viapiano, Leonard G. Luyt, Ralph Weissleder, E. Antonio Chiocca, Hakho Lee, Sean Lawler

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Combinatorial Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBrigham and Women's Hospital
KeywordsMagnetic beadMicrofluidicsNanotechnologySortingBeadChemistryCombinatorial chemistryMicrofluidic chipLab-on-a-chipComputer scienceComputational biologyChromatographyMaterials scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular targeting using ligands specific to disease markers has shown great promise for early detection and directed therapy. Bead-based combinatorial libraries have served as powerful tools for the discovery of novel targeting agents. Screening platforms employing magnetic capture have been used to achieve rapid and efficient identification of high-affinity ligands from one-bead-one-compound (OBOC) libraries. Traditional manual methodologies to isolate magnetized "hit" beads are tedious and lack accuracy, and existing instruments to expedite bead sorting tend to be costly and complex. Here, we describe the design and construction of a simple and inexpensive microfluidic magnetic sorting device using standard photolithography and soft lithography approaches to facilitate high-throughput isolation of magnetized positive hit beads from combinatorial libraries. We have demonstrated that the device is able to sort magnetized beads with superior accuracy compared to conventional manual sorting approaches. This chip offers a very convenient yet inexpensive alternative for screening OBOC libraries.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Combinatorial ScienceSame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207