MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2757799786 · doi:10.3390/mi8100290

Acoustic Manipulation of Bio-Particles at High Frequencies: An Analytical and Simulation Approach

2017· article· en· W2757799786 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamadmahdi Samandari, Karen Abrinia, Amir Sanati‐Nezhad

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcoustic radiation forceAcousticsWavelengthParticle (ecology)Finite element methodPosition (finance)Acoustic waveAcoustic radiationWork (physics)Materials scienceTracking (education)Standing waveResolution (logic)PhysicsOpticsUltrasoundComputer scienceRadiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Manipulation of micro and nano particles in microfluidic devices with high resolution is a challenge especially in bioengineering applications where bio-particles (BPs) are separated or patterned. While acoustic forces have been used to control the position of BPs, its theoretical aspects need further investigation particularly for high-resolution manipulation where the wavelength and particle size are comparable. In this study, we used a finite element method (FEM) to amend analytical calculations of acoustic radiation force (ARF) arising from an imposed standing ultrasound field. First, an acoustic solid interaction (ASI) approach was implemented to calculate the ARF exerted on BPs and resultant deformation induced to them. The results were then used to derive a revised expression for the ARF beyond the small particle assumption. The expression was further assessed in numerical simulations of one- and multi-directional standing acoustic waves (SAWs). Furthermore, a particle tracing scheme was used to investigate the effect of actual ARF on separation and patterning applications under experimentally-relevant conditions. The results demonstrated a significant mismatch between the actual force and previous analytical predictions especially for high frequencies of manipulation. This deviation found to be not only because of the shifted ARF values but also due to the variation in force maps in multidirectional wave propagation. Findings of this work can tackle the simulation limitations for spatiotemporal control of BPs using a high resolution acoustic actuation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207