AI-CMCA: a deep learning-based segmentation framework for capillary microfluidic chip analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Capillary microfluidic chips (CMCs) enable passive liquid transport via surface tension and wettability gradients, making them central to point-of-care diagnostics and biomedical sensing. However, accurate analysis of capillary-driven flow experiments remains constrained by the labour-intensive, time-consuming, and inconsistent nature of manual fluid path tracking. Here, we present AI-CMCA, an artificial intelligence framework designed for capillary microfluidic chip analysis, which automates fluid path detection and tracking using deep learning-based segmentation. AI-CMCA combines transfer learning-based feature initialization, encoder-decoder-based semantic segmentation to recognize fluid in each frame, and sequential frame analysis to track then quantify fluid progression. Among the five tested architectures, including U-Net, PAN, FPN, PSP-Net, and DeepLabV3+, the U-Net model with MobileNetV2 achieved the highest performance, with a validation IoU of 99.24% and an F1-score of 99.56%. Its lightweight design makes it well suited for smartphone or edge deployment. AI-CMCA demonstrated a strong correlation with manually extracted data while offering superior robustness and consistency in fluid path analysis. AI-CMCA performed fluid path analysis up to 100 times faster and over 10 times more consistently than manual tracking, reducing analysis time from days to minutes while maintaining high precision and reproducibility across diverse CMC architectures. By eliminating the need for manual annotation, AI-CMCA significantly enhances efficiency, precision, and automation in microfluidic research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".