MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611088855 · doi:10.1039/c7an00255f

Microscopic evaluation of aqueous two-phase system emulsion characteristics enables rapid determination of critical polymer concentrations for solution micropatterning

2017· article· en· W2611088855 on OpenAlexafffund
Mackenzie Ruthven, Kristin Robin Ko, Rishima Agarwal, John P. Frampton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicChemical and Physical Properties in Aqueous Solutions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicropatterningAqueous solutionEmulsionPolymerChemistryAqueous two-phase systemPhase (matter)Chemical engineeringMaterials scienceNanotechnologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aqueous two-phase systems have emerged as valuable tools for microscale analysis of cell growth and many other biotechnology applications. The most critical step in developing an aqueous two-phase system for a specific application is identifying the critical concentrations at which the polymer solutions phase-separate. Current techniques for determining these critical concentrations rely on laborious methods, highly specialized assays or computational methods that make this step difficult for non-specialists. To overcome these limitations, we present a simplified assay that uses only readily accessible laboratory instruments and consumables (e.g., multichannel micropipettes, 96-well plates and a simple compound microscope) to determine the critical concentrations of aqueous two-phase system-forming polymers. We demonstrate that formulations selected from phase diagrams that describe these critical concentrations can be applied for solution micropatterning of cells.

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)0.001
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 score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicChemical and Physical Properties in Aqueous SolutionsFrench-language works237,207