MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400073302

Piezoelectric driven non-toxic injector for automated cell manipulation.

2011· article· en· W2400073302 on OpenAlexaff
Haibo Huang, Hao Su, H. Y. Chen, James K. Mills

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipetteInjectorMicromanipulatorIntracytoplasmic sperm injectionMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceIn vitro fertilisationChemistryMechanical engineeringEngineeringEmbryoBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stimulated by state-of-the-art robotic and computer technology, Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) automation aims to scale and seamlessly transfer the human hand movements into more precise and fast movements of the micro manipulator. Piezo-drill cell injection, a novel technique using piezo-driven pipettes with a very small mercury column, has significantly improves the survival rates of ICSI process. It is found that complications are due, in large part, to toxicity of mercury and the damage to the cell membrane because of the lateral tip oscillations of injector pipette. In this paper, a new design of piezo-driven cell injector is proposed for automated suspended cell injection. This new piezo-driven cell injector design centralizes the piezo oscillation power on the injector pipette which eliminates the vibration effect on other parts of the micromanipulator. Detrimental lateral tip oscillations of the injector pipette are attenuated to a desirable level even without the help of mercury column. This mercury-free injector can sublime the piezoelectric driven injection technique to completely non-toxic level with great research and commercial application in gene injection, in-vitro fertilization, ICSI and drug development.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207