MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205255271 · doi:10.3791/50689-v

A Guided Materials Screening Approach for Developing Quantitative Sol-gel Derived Protein Microarrays

2013· article· en· W4205255271 on OpenAlexafffund
Blake-Joseph Helka, John D. Brennan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsDNA microarrayProtein microarrayMicroarrayComputational biologyHigh-throughput screeningDrug discoveryBiologyBioinformaticsBiochemistryGene expressionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microarrays have found use in the development of high-throughput assays for new materials and discovery of small-molecule drug leads. Herein we describe a guided material screening approach to identify sol-gel based materials that are suitable for producing three-dimensional protein microarrays. The approach first identifies materials that can be printed as microarrays, narrows down the number of materials by identifying those that are compatible with a given enzyme assay, and then hones in on optimal materials based on retention of maximum enzyme activity. This approach is applied to develop microarrays suitable for two different enzyme assays, one using acetylcholinesterase and the other using a set of four key kinases involved in cancer. In each case, it was possible to produce microarrays that could be used for quantitative small-molecule screening assays and production of dose-dependent inhibitor response curves. Importantly, the ability to screen many materials produced information on the types of materials that best suited both microarray production and retention of enzyme activity. The materials data provide insight into basic material requirements necessary for tailoring optimal, high-density sol-gel derived microarrays.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.372 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207