Macromolecular microfluidic concentrators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microfluidic design, fabrication, and experiments have developed rapidly, leading to lab-on-chip separation or fractionation. In this work, we design a continuous concentrator for macromolecular solutions. Our design relies on the analytical solutions for orientational diffusion under laminar pressure-driven slot flow through a microchannel [W. Stasiak and C. Cohen, “Dilute solutions of macromolecules in a rectilinear Poiseuille flow,” J. Chem. Phys. 78, 553 (1983)]. Using rigid dumbbell theory, we provide analytical solutions for the design of our microfluidic macromolecular hydrodynamic chromatography. We arrive at our design through the use of well-known confinement-driven composition profiles. Using a pair of razor-sharp blades, our design separates the slot flow into a symmetric core inner slot (concentrated) between two outer slots (diluted). We discover a minimum dimensionless blade leading edge separation for complete fractionation, and that this decreases with confinement and also decreases with dimensionless shear rate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".