Facile Fabrication Method of Conical Microwells Using Non‐Uniform Photolithography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Microwells have emerged as a popular trapping platform for numerous biological applications because of their ease of use. 3D shaped microwells, such as conical wells other than a simple 2D profile, have received great attention because of their excellent capacity for the formation of 3D cancer spheroids. However, creating such conical microwells require a complex fabrication process, laborious procedures, and specialized equipment. Herein, a facile and single‐step fabrication technique is developed to make microwells with a tapered‐bottom. In this approach, non‐uniform polymerization is implemented during photolithography to create conical microwells of poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate on a glass substrate in a PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane) microfluidic channel. The non‐cylindrical shape forms through the UV exposure and further develops during the washing step by the removal of excess unpolymerized monomer from the PDMS microfluidic channel. In combination with the non‐uniform photopolymerization, this washing process results in microwells with 3D conical forms, offering control over shape and homogeneity. Notably, the technique allows additional control over the microwells surface morphology, that is, wrinkled and smooth surfaces. Finally, the effect of ethanol flow rates on the pore size is investigated.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".