Micro‐ and Nano‐Bots for Infection Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical micro- and nano-bots (MMBs and MNBs) have attracted a lot of attention owing to their precise motion for accessing difficult-to-reach areas in the body. These emerging tools offer the promise of non-invasive diagnostics and therapeutics for a wide range of ailments. Here, it is highlighted how MMBs and MNBs can revolutionize infection management. The latest applications of MMBs and MNBs are explored for infection prevention, including their use as accurate, minimally invasive surgeons and diagnosis, where they function as sensitive and rapid biosensors or carriers for contrast agents for real-time imaging of infected tissue. Further, the applications are outlined in treatment serving as anti-biofilm agents and smart carriers for antibiotics and anti-infective biologics. The current challenges in designing MMBs and MNBs are highlighted for overcoming immune barriers, moving to deep infected tissue, and swimming in low Reynolds numbers and discuss mitigating strategies. Finally, as a future perspective, the potential advantages of multi-drive propulsion, bioinspired, and artificial-intelligence-trained MMBs and MNBs are discussed, with a special focus on challenges and opportunities for their commercialization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".