Electron Microscopy Imaging Applications of Room Temperature Ionic Liquids in the Biological Field: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For biological imaging using electron microscopy (EM), the use of room-temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) has been proposed as an alternative to traditional lengthy preparation methods. With their low vapor pressures and conductivity, RTILs can be applied onto hard-to-image soft and/or wet samples without dehydration - allowing for a more representative, hydrated state of material and opening the possibility for visualization of in situ physiological processes using conventional EM systems. However, RTILs have yet to be utilized to their full potential by microscopists and microbiologists alike. To this end, this review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of biological applications of RTILs for EM to bridge the RTIL, in situ microscopy, and biological communities. We outline future research avenues for the use of RTILs for the EM observation of biological samples, notably i) RTIL selection and optimization, ii) applications for live cell processes and iii) electron beam and ionic liquid interaction studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".