Patterned Optoelectronic Tweezers: A New Scheme for Selecting, Moving, and Storing Dielectric Particles and Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical micromanipulation has become popular for a wide range of applications. In this work, a new type of optical micromanipulation platform, patterned optoelectronic tweezers (p-OET), is introduced. In p-OET devices, the photoconductive layer (that is continuous in a conventional OET device) is patterned, forming regions in which the electrode layer is locally exposed. It is demonstrated that micropatterns in the photoconductive layer are useful for repelling unwanted particles/cells, and also for keeping selected particles/cells in place after turning off the light source, minimizing light-induced heating. To clarify the physical mechanism behind these effects, systematic simulations are carried out, which indicate the existence of strong nonuniform electric fields at the boundary of micropatterns. The simulations are consistent with experimental observations, which are explored for a wide variety of geometries and conditions. It is proposed that the new technique may be useful for myriad applications in the rapidly growing area of optical micromanipulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".