MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080757208 · doi:10.1021/acs.oprd.0c00207

Mini-Monoplant Technology for Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

2020· article· en· W3080757208 on OpenAlexafffund
Brendon J. Doyle, Petteri Elsner, Bernhard Gutmann, Olivier Hannaerts, Christof Aellig, Arturo Macchi, Dominique M. Roberge

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic Process Research & Development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProduction (economics)Manufacturing engineeringFactory (object-oriented programming)Pharmaceutical industryKey (lock)Computer scienceBiochemical engineeringBusinessProcess engineeringEngineeringBiotechnologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Pharmaceutical production has historically relied on multipurpose batch vessels in order to produce material through scheduled production campaigns. Although this method is flexible, it is becoming less effective in addressing the changing landscape of pharmaceutical production, where more complex and potent molecules are required to be produced more rapidly and can have fluctuations in their demand. This article describes a method for developing intensified and dedicated pharmaceutical processes, known as mini-monoplants. Key value-generating aspects are described at each stage of development, from lab-based development of best-in-class processes to factory-based development for an accelerated time to market and finally to mini-monoplant technology for production at commercial scale.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic Process Research & DevelopmentSame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207