Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37850136›Full record

ReviewBiodesign research2022

Hardware, Software, and Wetware Codesign Environment for Synthetic Biology.

Samuel M D Oliveira, Douglas Densmore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biodesign research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Samuel M D OliveiraDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, MA 02215, USA.
Douglas DensmoreDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, MA 02215, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7666-6808

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic biology is the process of forward engineering living systems. These systems can be used to produce biobased materials, agriculture, medicine, and energy. One approach to designing these systems is to employ techniques from the design of embedded electronics. These techniques include abstraction, standards, modularity, automated design, and formal semantic models of computation. Together, these elements form the foundation of "biodesign automation," where software, robotics, and microfluidic devices combine to create exciting biological systems of the future. This paper describes a "hardware, software, wetware" codesign vision where software tools can be made to act as "genetic compilers" that transform high-level specifications into engineered "genetic circuits" (wetware). This is followed by a process where automation equipment, well-defined experimental workflows, and microfluidic devices are explicitly designed to house, execute, and test these circuits (hardware). These systems can be used as either massively parallel experimental platforms or distributed bioremediation and biosensing devices. Next, scheduling and control algorithms (software) manage these systems' actual execution and data analysis tasks. A distinguishing feature of this approach is how all three of these aspects (hardware, software, and wetware) may be derived from the same basic specification in parallel and generated to fulfill specific cost, performance, and structural requirements.

Identifiers

PMID37850136
PMCPMC10521664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.