Microrobotic swarms for selective embolization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspired by the collective intelligence in natural swarms, microrobotic agents have been controlled to form artificial swarms for targeted drug delivery, enhanced imaging, and hyperthermia. Different from these well-investigated tasks, this work aims to develop microrobotic swarms for embolization, which is a clinical technique used to block blood vessels for treating tumors, fistulas, and arteriovenous malformations. Magnetic particle swarms were formed for selective embolization to address the low selectivity of the present embolization technique that is prone to cause complications such as stroke and blindness. We established an analytical model that describes the relationships between fluid viscosity, flow rate, branching angle, magnetic field strength, and swarm integrity, based on which an actuation strategy was developed to maintain the swarm integrity inside a targeted region under fluidic flow conditions. Experiments in microfluidic channels, ex vivo tissues, and in vivo porcine kidneys validated the efficacy of the proposed strategy for selective embolization.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it