MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782030796 · doi:10.2741/4651

Electromagnetic elds and optomechanics in cancer diagnostics and treatment

2018· review· en· W2782030796 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in bioscience · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMagnetic and Electromagnetic Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGrantová Agentura České RepublikyEuropean Commission
KeywordsOptomechanicsContext (archaeology)Electromagnetic fieldCancer treatmentPhysicsCoupling (piping)Cancer therapyComputer scienceNanotechnologyCancerMedicineBiologyOpticsEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we discuss biological effects of electromagnetic (EM) fields in the context of cancer biology. In particular, we review the nanomechanical properties of microtubules (MTs), the latter being one of the most successful targets for cancer therapy. We propose an investigation on the coupling of electromagnetic radiation to mechanical vibrations of MTs as an important basis for biological and medical applications. In our opinion, optomechanical methods can accurately monitor and control the mechanical properties of isolated MTs in a liquid environment. Consequently, studying nanomechanical properties of MTs may give useful information for future applications to diagnostic and therapeutic technologies involving non-invasive externally applied physical fields. For example, electromagnetic fields or high intensity ultrasound can be used therapeutically avoiding harmful side effects of chemotherapeutic agents or classical radiation therapy.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.288 · 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