Comparative Evaluation of Artificial Neural Networks and Data Analysis in Predicting Liposome Size in a Periodic Disturbance Micromixer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial neural networks (ANN) and data analysis (DA) are powerful tools for supporting decision-making. They are employed in diverse fields, and one of them is nanotechnology; for example, in predicting silver nanoparticles size. To our knowledge, we are the first to use ANN to predict liposome size (LZ). Liposomes are lipid nanoparticles used in different biomedical applications that can be produced in Dean-Forces-based microdevices such as the Periodic Disturbance Micromixer (PDM). In this work, ANN and DA techniques are used to build a LZ prediction model by using the most relevant variables in a PDM, the Flow Rate Radio (FRR), and the Total Flow Rate (TFR), and the temperature, solvents, and concentrations were kept constant. The ANN was designed in MATLAB and fed data from 60 experiments with 70% training, 15% validation, and 15% testing. For DA, a regression analysis was used. The model was evaluated; it showed a 0.98147 correlation coefficient for training and 0.97247 in total data compared with 0.882 obtained by DA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".