MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498494303 · doi:10.1002/9783527690237.ch12

Magnetotactic Bacteria for the Manipulation and Transport of Micro‐ and Nanometer‐Sized Objects

2015· other· en· W2498494303 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Martel

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced micro & nanosystems · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetotactic bacteriaNanometreComponent (thermodynamics)NanotechnologyBacteriaIsolation (microbiology)Biochemical engineeringMagnetosomeComputer scienceBiological systemMaterials scienceEngineeringBiologyPhysicsChemical engineeringMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The manipulation or transport of micro- and nanometer-sized objects is an important research area and one that can impact several applications. The main advantage of mechanical manipulation or transport over other methods is that it is fairly independent of the properties of the components being manipulated. For precise and predictable computer-controlled transport and manipulation tasks, a specific type of flagellated bacteria known as magnetotactic bacteria (MTB) is considered. Several MTB per component is required to scale the force accordingly. A few micrometers are sufficient to allow the MTB to swim underneath the component that needs to be manipulated. The self-replicating feature of the bacteria makes it an attractive solution where relatively low-cost manufacturing of a huge number of microactuators is highly desirable. Such advantage is paid by the fact that such bacterial microactuators will operate in restricted environmental conditions compared to artificial methods.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced micro & nanosystemsSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207