MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801567745 · doi:10.4155/bio-2017-0271

Surface Plasmon Resonance as a Tool for Ligand-Binding Assay Reagent Characterization in Bioanalysis of Biotherapeutics

2018· article· en· W2801567745 on OpenAlexaff
Jia Duo, JoAnne Bruno, Alexander Kozhich, Donata David-brown, Linlin Luo, Suk Kwok, Rasa Santockyte, Jonathan Haulenbeek, Rong Liu, Lora Hamuro, Jon E. Peterson, Steven P. Piccoli, Binodh DeSilva, Renuka Pillutla, Yan J Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBioanalysis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsSierra Wireless (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface plasmon resonanceBioanalysisReagentCombinatorial chemistryCharacterization (materials science)Ligand (biochemistry)NanotechnologyChemistryComputer scienceMaterials scienceNanoparticleOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ligand-binding assay (LBA) performance depends on quality reagents. Strategic reagent screening and characterization is critical to LBA development, optimization and validation. Application of advanced technologies expedites the reagent screening and assay development process. By evaluating surface plasmon resonance technology that offers high-throughput kinetic information, this article aims to provide perspectives on applying the surface plasmon resonance technology to strategic LBA critical reagent screening and characterization supported by a number of case studies from multiple biotherapeutic programs.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioanalysisSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207