MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008506219 · doi:10.3390/mi11030235

Surface Response Based Modeling of Liposome Characteristics in a Periodic Disturbance Mixer

2020· article· en· W3008506219 on OpenAlexafffund
Rubén R. López, Ixchel Ocampo, Luz-María Sánchez, Anas Alazzam, Karl‐F. Bergeron, Sérgio Camacho-León, Cathérine Mounier, Ion Stiharu, Vahé Nerguizian

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalConcordia UniversityÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersUniversitat Politècnica de CatalunyaMcGill University Health CentreNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité du Québec à MontréalCMC MicrosystemsConcordia UniversityÉcole de technologie supérieureKhalifa University of Science, Technology and ResearchMcGill University
KeywordsLiposomeZeta potentialDispersityBiological systemParticle sizeVolumetric flow rateVesicleMicromixerResponse surface methodologyMaterials scienceNanotechnologyNanoparticleChemistryChromatographyMechanicsMicrofluidicsMembranePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liposomes nanoparticles (LNPs) are vesicles that encapsulate drugs, genes, and imaging labels for advanced delivery applications. Control and tuning liposome physicochemical characteristics such as size, size distribution, and zeta potential are crucial for their functionality. Liposome production using micromixers has shown better control over liposome characteristics compared with classical approaches. In this work, we used our own designed and fabricated Periodic Disturbance Micromixer (PDM). We used Design of Experiments (DoE) and Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to statistically model the relationship between the Total Flow Rate (TFR) and Flow Rate Ratio (FRR) and the resulting liposomes physicochemical characteristics. TFR and FRR effectively control liposome size in the range from 52 nm to 200 nm. In contrast, no significant effect was observed for the TFR on the liposomes Polydispersity Index (PDI); conversely, FRR around 2.6 was found to be a threshold between highly monodisperse and low polydispersed populations. Moreover, it was shown that the zeta potential is independent of TFR and FRR. The developed model presented on the paper enables to pre-establish the experimental conditions under which LNPs would likely be produced within a specified size range. Hence, the model utility was demonstrated by showing that LNPs were produced under such conditions.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207