MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407693540 · doi:10.1002/elps.8106

Design Guidelines of Free‐Flow Counterflow Gradient Focusing Device for Protein Fractionation

2025· article· en· W4407693540 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew Courtney, Oscar Manuel Carreno‐Molina, Carolyn L. Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsFractionationFabricationFlow (mathematics)Polymethyl methacrylateComputationComputer scienceResolution (logic)Construct (python library)Materials scienceChipWork (physics)ChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)NanotechnologyChemistryMechanicsMechanical engineeringAlgorithmEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free-flow counterflow gradient focusing (FF-CGF) is a promising tool for protein fractionation. This work establishes guidelines to construct an FF-CGF system suitable for preparative applications. Numerical and analytical computations are undertaken to investigate design parameters, including device geometry, flow conditions, sample concentration, and applied voltage. This collective information serves as a design tool to guide the fabrication of the device, which, in this case, is constructed from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and double-sided tape. Furthermore, the design tool also supports device operation and provides insights into the expected resolution and throughput. Experimental results, which demonstrated the ability of the designed chip to generate a uniform counterflow gradient while separating small molecules and proteins, validated the accuracy of the design guidelines.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207