MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116317467 · doi:10.1049/enb2.70005

Software System Design to Support Scale in Mammalian Cell Line Engineering

2025· article· en· W7116317467 on OpenAlexaff
David McClymont, Baird McIlwraith, Althea Green, Sam Coulson, Elizabeth Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowBioproductionAutomationSoftwareProcess (computing)Software designProcess automation systemSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell line engineering (CLE) is the process of gene editing cell lines for a variety of purposes including research and development or bioproduction processes. Traditionally, CLE workflows have been manual and low throughput. Here, we describe the development of several software-based processes, implemented alongside wet lab automation and robotics, built to improve the throughput of our CLE platform to three times its previous capacity. A markup language (GEML) was developed to enable e-commerce capabilities and connections to internal manufacturing systems. A laboratory information management system (LIMS), specifically designed to track CLE projects through all stages, was created to manufacture the cell line specified by the GEML. Cell line engineering required analysis of images in brightfield without fluorescent staining; therefore, a machine learning (ML)-based method for analysing engineered clones imaged captured on an automated imaging platform was created. Our work demonstrates that combining both wet lab automation and software approaches is essential to allow CLE workflows to reach their full potential, allowing the development of high-throughput robust platforms that meet the increasing demands of the field.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 venueEngineering BiologySame topicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in InsectsFrench-language works237,207