MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414093400 · doi:10.3390/app15189858

Light Modulation and Biophoton Emissions: A Proof-of-Principle Study of Direct and Proximal Cellular Effects

2025· article· en· W4414093400 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel J. Levac, Blake T. Dotta

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiofield Effects and Biophysics
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViability assayStimulationBlue lightTwo-photon excitation microscopyCell culturePhotic StimulationCellGreen-light

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultraweak photon emissions (UPEs) are a consistent feature of cellular metabolism, yet their potential role in mediating communication between cells remains poorly defined. This study examined whether temporally patterned light can produce biological effects not only in directly exposed malignant cells but also in neighboring, unexposed populations. B16-BL6 and MCF-7 cell lines were exposed to blue LED stimulation structured by a physiologically relevant temporal pattern, and photon emissions were quantified using a photomultiplier tube. Both cell lines showed increased viability and elevated photon emission centered near 21 Hz following direct exposure (p < 0.05). Importantly, B16-BL6 cultures that were never directly exposed but later housed in proximity to the stimulated cells displayed similar changes in both viability and emission frequency. These findings provide proof-of-principle evidence that patterned light can alter biophoton emissions and viability not only in directly stimulated cancer cells but also in proximal, unexposed populations, supporting the possibility of photonic propagation effects under controlled conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicBiofield Effects and BiophysicsFrench-language works237,207