Recent Advances of Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Lab on a Chip for Diagnosis and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, artificial intelligence (AI) creates numerous promising opportunities in the life sciences. AI methods can be significantly advantageous for analyzing the massive datasets provided by biotechnology systems for biological and biomedical applications. Microfluidics, with the developments in controlled reaction chambers, high-throughput arrays, and positioning systems, generate big data that is not necessarily analyzed successfully. Integrating AI and microfluidics can pave the way for both experimental and analytical throughputs in biotechnology research. Microfluidics enhances the experimental methods and reduces the cost and scale, while AI methods significantly improve the analysis of huge datasets obtained from high-throughput and multiplexed microfluidics. This review briefly presents a survey of the role of AI and microfluidics in biotechnology. Also, the incorporation of AI with microfluidics is comprehensively investigated. Specifically, recent studies that perform flow cytometry cell classification, cell isolation, and a combination of them by gaining from both AI methods and microfluidic techniques are covered. Despite all current challenges, various fields of biotechnology can be remarkably affected by the combination of AI and microfluidic technologies. Some of these fields include point-of-care systems, precision, personalized medicine, regenerative medicine, prognostics, diagnostics, and treatment of oncology and non-oncology-related diseases.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".