MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979442428 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2019.8861842

Machine Learning with Digital Microfluidics for Drug Discovery and Development

2019· article· en· W2979442428 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrowetting and Microfluidic Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrug discoveryComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Machine learningBiopharmaceuticalMicrofluidicsDigital microfluidicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringNanotechnologyBioinformaticsBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug discovery and development plays an increasing important role in biopharmaceutical field. However, current drug discovery is slow, expensive, inefficient and error prone. Digital microfluidic platform is potentially a very precious technique for drug discovery applications. In addition, machine learning algorithms have been used as a useful tool in drug discovery. New technological shifts in the fields of drug discovery can rely on computer-aided design algorithms in digital microfluidics to acquire data and machine learning algorithms to analyze date, in order to improve throughput and reliability, especially in the context of complex bioassays with different formulations. This paper reviews current and future applications of microfluidic in drug discovery using machine learning and highlight the potential of a new design which combine digital microfluidics with machine learning algorithms for drug discovery applications.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.159
Teacher spread0.156 · 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