MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oxygen Measurement in Microdevices

2022· review· en· W4282569048 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha M. Grist, Kevin L. Bennewith, Karen C. Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Analytical Chemistry · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMitacs
KeywordsOxygen sensorMicroscale chemistryBioprocessNanotechnologyComputer scienceOxygenProcess engineeringBiochemical engineeringMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxygen plays a fundamental role in respiration and metabolism, and quantifying oxygen levels is essential in many environmental, industrial, and research settings. Microdevices facilitate the study of dynamic, oxygen-dependent effects in real time. This review is organized around the key needs for oxygen measurement in microdevices, including integrability into microfabricated systems; sensor dynamic range and sensitivity; spatially resolved measurements to map oxygen over two- or three-dimensional regions of interest; and compatibility with multimodal and multianalyte measurements. After a brief overview of biological readouts of oxygen, followed by oxygen sensor types that have been implemented in microscale devices and sensing mechanisms, this review presents select recent applications in organs-on-chip in vitro models and new sensor capabilities enabling oxygen microscopy, bioprocess manufacturing, and pharmaceutical industries. With the advancement of multiplexed, interconnected sensors and instruments and integration with industry workflows, intelligent microdevice-sensor systems including oxygen sensors will have further impact in environmental science, manufacturing, and medicine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Analytical ChemistrySame topicAnalytical Chemistry and SensorsFrench-language works237,207