The optoelectronic microrobot: A versatile toolbox for micromanipulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microrobotics extends the reach of human-controlled machines to submillimeter dimensions. We introduce a microrobot that relies on optoelectronic tweezers (OET) that is straightforward to manufacture, can take nearly any desirable shape or form, and can be programmed to carry out sophisticated, multiaxis operations. One particularly useful program is a serial combination of "load," "transport," and "deliver," which can be applied to manipulate a wide range of micrometer-dimension payloads. Importantly, microrobots programmed in this manner are much gentler on fragile mammalian cells than conventional OET techniques. The microrobotic system described here was demonstrated to be useful for single-cell isolation, clonal expansion, RNA sequencing, manipulation within enclosed systems, controlling cell-cell interactions, and isolating precious microtissues from heterogeneous mixtures. We propose that the optoelectronic microrobotic system, which can be implemented using a microscope and consumer-grade optical projector, will be useful for a wide range of applications in the life sciences and beyond.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".