MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307649984 · doi:10.1002/ejoc.202200968

Colloidosomes as a Protocell Model: Engineering Life‐Like Behaviour through Organic Chemistry

2022· article· en· W4307649984 on OpenAlexafffund
Jun Hyeong Park, Agostino Galanti, India Ayling, Sébastien Rochat, Mark S. Workentin, Pierangelo Gobbo

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Organic Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsProtocellChemistryNanotechnologyCoacervateArtificial cellAmphiphileMembraneOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceBiochemistryCopolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The bottom‐up synthesis of self‐assembled micro‐compartmentalised systems that mimic basic characteristics of living cells is rapidly evolving. These types of systems are termed “protocells” and can be chemically programmed to grow and divide, to send and receive chemical signals, to transcript and translate chemical information, to adhere to surfaces or to other protocells, and to perform rudimental enzyme‐mediated metabolic processes. An emerging protocell model that is attracting great attention is the colloidosome. Colloidosomes are microcapsules with a chemically crosslinked, semipermeable membrane composed of amphiphilic nanoparticles. Colloidosomes display important advantages over other protocell models (e. g., vesicles and coacervate micro‐droplets) due to their physical‐chemical properties that can be easily tuned through the careful engineering of their synthetic building blocks. In this review, we deliver an overview of the different types of colloidosomes that have been developed thus far and discuss how organic chemistry contributes to the design and bottom‐up synthesis of novel types of colloidosomes endowed with advanced chemically programmed bio‐inspired functions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Organic ChemistrySame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207