MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769344220 · doi:10.1038/protex.2017.133

A triple-unit microfluidic device (D3-chip) for cell migration research

2017· article· en· W2769344220 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Francis Lin, Ke Yang, Jiandong Wu, Ling Zhu, Yong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueProtocol Exchange · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsChipMicrofluidic chipMicrofluidicsUnit (ring theory)Computer scienceNanotechnologyMaterials scienceTelecommunicationsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemotaxis is an important research eld and many research labs are studying the mechanisms of chemotaxis of different cell types and its biomedical applications.During the past 20 years, micro uidic devices have been extensively used for chemotaxis research mainly owing to their advantage in cellular microenvironmental control.However, micro uidic chemotaxis experiments are not easy to set up and often limited by lengthy data analysis and the low-throughout.To address these issues, we developed a new triple-unit gradient-generating micro uidic device \(i.e.D3-Chip).The main features of this D3-Chip include standalone stable gradient generation, docking structure for cell alignment, parallel chemotaxis experiments on a single chip and rapid chemotaxis distance measurement without time-lapse imaging and single cell tracking.This D3-Chip was successfully applied to two recently published chemotaxis studies including the effect of broblast growth factor 23 \(FGF23) on neutrophil chemotaxis and the effect of activin A on neutrophil and human breast cancer cell chemotaxis.We believe this D3-Chip can be broadly useful to other cell migration researchers.In this protocol, we describe detailed fabrication and operation of the D3-Chip for cell migration experiments.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtocol ExchangeSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207