MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408719732 · doi:10.1117/12.3042226

Progress and advances in the development of a label-free optofluidic platform based on quantitative phase digital holographic microscopy and microfluidics for the identification of human disease-specific cell phenotypes (Conference Presentation)

2025· article· en· W4408719732 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Bélanger, Gabrielle Jess, Corentin Soubeiran, Céline Larivière-Loiselle, Sara Mattar, Niraj Patel, Zahra Yazdani-Najafabadi, Mohamed Haouat, Johan Chaniot, Jodie Llinares, Émile Rioux-Péllerin, Marie‐Ève Crochetière, Jean-Xavier Giroux, Antoine Allard, Patrick Desrosiers, Pierre Marquet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofluidicsDigital holographic microscopyIdentification (biology)HolographyComputer scienceNanotechnologyPresentation (obstetrics)Digital microfluidicsOptofluidicsComputational biologyMaterials scienceBiologyPhysicsOpticsOptoelectronicsElectrowettingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in stem cell technology allow the reprogramming of patient-derived cells, obtained from urine samples or skin biopsies, into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), which can then be differentiated into any cell type. With this goal in mind, we will present how experimental developments, mostly in the field of microfluidics, can be used to extract several relevant spatiotemporal biophysical properties from the quantitative phase signal provided by digital holographic microscopy, thus moving towards the realization of a truly effective optofluidic platform for non-invasive characterization of cell structure and dynamics. Such label-free characterization is highly conducive to the identification of disease-specific cell phenotypes when comparing iPSC-derived cells from control and diseased patients.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Holography and MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207