MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931177318 · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-41938-z

Efficient Low Shear Flow-based Trapping of Biological Entities

2019· article· en· W2931177318 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Sohrabi Kashani, Muthukumaran Packirisamy

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesConcordia UniversityCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrappingFlow (mathematics)Computer scienceShear (geology)MechanicsMaterials scienceBiologyPhysicsEcologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capturing cells or biological entities is an important and challenging step toward in-vitro studies of cells under a precisely controlled microscale environment. In this work, we have developed a compact and efficient microdevice for on-chip trapping of micro-sized particles. This hydrodynamics-based trapping system allows the isolation of polystyrene micro-particles with a shorter time while inducing a less hydrodynamic deformation and stress on the particles or cells both after and before trapping. A numerical simulation was carried out to design a hydrodynamic trapping mechanism and optimize the geometric and fluidic parameters affecting the trapping efficiency of the microfluidic network. By using the finite element analysis, the velocity field, pressure field, and hydrodynamic force on the micro particles were studied. Finally, a PDMS microfluidic device was fabricated to test the device's ability to trap polystyrene microspheres. Computational fluid analysis and experimental testing showed a high trapping efficiency that is more than 90%. This microdevice can be used for single cell studies including their biological, physical and chemical characterization.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207