MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309221574 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2256913/v1

IRONSperm swimming by Rigid-Body Rotation Versus Transverse Bending Waves

2022· preprint· en· W4309221574 on OpenAlexaff
Veronika Magdanz, Anke Klingner, Léon Abelmann, Islam S. M. Khalil

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMicro and Nano Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlagellumBendingRotation (mathematics)Bending stiffnessTransverse planeStiffnessFlexibility (engineering)MechanicsPhysicsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyClassical mechanicsGeometryStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cell membrane potential affects the electrostatic self-assembly of magnetizable nanoparticles around the flagellum of sperm cells, leading to the formation of biohybrid microrobots (i.e. IRONSperm) with various bending stiffness. Here we explain the influence of bull sperm cell membrane potential on the formation of two types of IRONSperm samples that are produced by electrostatic self-assembly. The first is a proximal-coated soft body with nanoparticles concentrated on the head to maintain high flexibility of the flagellum and create a passively propagating transverse bending wave under the influence of an external rotating magnetic field. The second is a rigid-body with nanoparticles approximately uniformly distributed along the length to provide arbitrary geometry that maintains a constant chiral shape and propel by rotation about its long axis. We present a magneto-elastohydrodynamic model to predict the swimming speed at low Reynolds number for rigid IRONSperm with arbitrary shapes, and show that decreasing the bending stiffness allows the model to capture the behavior of its soft counterpart. While the response of a rigid chiral IRONSperm is distinguished by a greater swimming speed with a smooth decay with frequency, the benefit of a soft flagellum in certain scenarios would present a much smaller range of frequencies for wireless actuation.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicMicro and Nano RoboticsFrench-language works237,207