PENGGUNAAN KUTEKS SEBAGAI ALTERNATIF MOUNTING MEDIA PADA PEMBUATAN PREPARAT JARINGAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mounting media is one of the important components in making tissue slides. Mounting media serves to cover the tissue on the slide to protect it from damage and also creates a refractive index between the tissue and objective lens approach, so that it can be seen clearly when observed using a microscope. Mounting media commonly used in the laboratory for tissue slide include entelan, Canada balsam and DFX. The aim of this research is to find an alternative mounting media that is cheap, easy to obtain and has a value comparable to the commonly used mounting media. The study used various organs of the liver, kidney, testes and brain stained with Haematoxylin Eosin. The analysis used is descriptive analysis by comparing the quality of the tissue slides using different mounting media, that is entelan and nail polish. The test parameters to see the quality of the results from the use of mounting media are the contrast of the tissue slides, the details of the nucleus and the brightness of the cytoplasm. The results of the study showed comparable values for tissue slide contrast, nucleus detail and the brightness of the cytoplasm for all the organs made. It is advisable to use other stains to ensure that the use of nail polish can be used as a mounting media in the laboratory
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".