MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966310143 · doi:10.1002/anie.201907817

Potential‐Responsive Surfaces for Manipulation of Cell Adhesion, Release, and Differentiation

2019· article· en· W2966310143 on OpenAlexafffund
Libing Zhang, Zongjie Wang, Jagotamoy Das, Mahmoud Labib, Sharif Ahmed, Edward H. Sargent, Shana O. Kelley

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie International Edition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAdhesionCell adhesionAdipogenesisCell biologyCellBiophysicsStem cellCellular differentiationChemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceBiologyBiochemistryMesenchymal stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In living systems, interfacial molecular interactions control many biological processes. New stimuli-responsive strategies are desired to provide versatile model systems that can regulate cell behavior in vitro. Described here are potential-responsive surfaces that control cell adhesion and release as well as stem cell differentiation. Cell adhesion can be modulated dynamically by applying negative and positive potentials to surfaces functionalized with tailored monolayers. This process alters cell morphology and ultimately controls behavior and the fate of the cells. Cells can be detached from the electrode surface as intact clusters with different geometries using electrochemical potentials. Importantly, morphological changes during adhesion guide stem cell differentiation. The higher accessibility of the peptide under a positive applied potential causes phenotypic changes in the cells that are hallmarks of osteogenesis, whereas lower accessibility of the peptide promoted by negative potentials leads to adipogenesis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte Chemie International EditionSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207