MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409156819 · doi:10.1063/5.0263344

Mechanical interaction between a hydrogel and an embedded cell in biomicrofluidic applications

2025· article· en· W4409156819 on OpenAlexafffund
Lei Li, Jiaqi Zhang, Pengtao Yue, James J. Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomicrofluidics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSelf-healing hydrogelsPoromechanicsMicrofluidicsMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringNanotechnologyFinite element methodTissue engineeringBiocompatibilityExtracellular matrixPorous mediumPorosityChemistryComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thanks to their softness, biocompatibility, porosity, and ready availability, hydrogels are commonly used in microfluidic assays and organ-on-chip devices as a matrix for cells. They not only provide a supporting scaffold for the differentiating cells and the developing organoids, but also serve as the medium for transmitting oxygen, nutrients, various chemical factors, and mechanical stimuli to the cells. From a bioengineering viewpoint, the transmission of forces from fluid perfusion to the cells through the hydrogel is critical to the proper function and development of the cell colony. In this paper, we develop a poroelastic model to represent the fluid flow through a hydrogel containing a biological cell modeled as a hyperelastic inclusion. In geometries representing shear and normal flows that occur frequently in microfluidic experiments, we use finite-element simulations to examine how the perfusion engenders interstitial flow in the gel and displaces and deforms the embedded cell. The results show that pressure is the most important stress component in moving and deforming the cell, and the model predicts the velocity in the gel and stress transmitted to the cell that is comparable to in vitro and in vivo data. This work provides a computational tool to design the geometry and flow conditions to achieve optimal flow and stress fields inside the hydrogels and around the cell.

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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomicrofluidicsSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207