Computational Modelling and Big Data Analysis of Flow and Drug Transport in Microfluidic Systems: A Spheroid-on-a-Chip Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microfluidic tumour spheroid-on-a-chip platforms enable control of spheroid size and their microenvironment and offer the capability of high-throughput drug screening, but drug supply to spheroids is a complex process that depends on a combination of mechanical, biochemical, and biophysical factors. To account for these coupled effects, many microfluidic device designs and operating conditions must be considered and optimized in a time- and labour-intensive trial-and-error process. Computational modelling facilitates a systematic exploration of a large design parameter space via in silico simulations, but the majority of in silico models apply only a small set of conditions or parametric levels. Novel approaches to computational modelling are needed to explore large parameter spaces and accelerate the optimization of spheroid-on-a-chip and other organ-on-a-chip designs. Here, we report an efficient computational approach for simulating fluid flow and transport of drugs in a high-throughput arrayed cancer spheroid-on-a-chip platform. Our strategy combines four key factors: i) governing physical equations; ii) parametric sweeping; iii) parallel computing; and iv) extensive dataset analysis, thereby enabling a complete “full-factorial” exploration of the design parameter space in combinatorial fashion. The simulations were conducted in a time-efficient manner without requiring massive computational time. As a case study, we simulated >15,000 microfluidic device designs and flow conditions for a representative multicellular spheroids-on-a-chip arrayed device, thus acquiring a single dataset consisting of ∼10 billion datapoints in ∼95 GBs. To validate our computational model, we performed physical experiments in a representative spheroid-on-a-chip device that showed excellent agreement between experimental and simulated data. This study offers a computational strategy to accelerate the optimization of microfluidic device designs and provide insight on the flow and drug transport in spheroid-on-a-chip and other biomicrofluidic platforms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".