Difference between revisions of "Team:Newcastle/Model"

Line 4: Line 4:
 
<head>
 
<head>
  
   <link rel="stylesheet" href="https://maxcdn.bootstrapcdn.com/bootstrap/4.0.0-beta/css/bootstrap.min.css"  
+
   <link rel="stylesheet" href="https://maxcdn.bootstrapcdn.com/bootstrap/4.0.0-beta/css/bootstrap.min.css"
 
integrity="sha384-/Y6pD6FV/Vv2HJnA6t+vslU6fwYXjCFtcEpHbNJ0lyAFsXTsjBbfaDjzALeQsN6M" crossorigin="anonymous"/>
 
integrity="sha384-/Y6pD6FV/Vv2HJnA6t+vslU6fwYXjCFtcEpHbNJ0lyAFsXTsjBbfaDjzALeQsN6M" crossorigin="anonymous"/>
  
Line 17: Line 17:
 
fieldset, form, label, legend,
 
fieldset, form, label, legend,
 
table, caption, tbody, tfoot, thead, tr, th, td,
 
table, caption, tbody, tfoot, thead, tr, th, td,
article, aside, canvas, details, embed,  
+
article, aside, canvas, details, embed,
figure, figcaption, footer, header, hgroup,  
+
figure, figcaption, footer, header, hgroup,
 
menu, nav, output, ruby, section, summary,
 
menu, nav, output, ruby, section, summary,
 
time, mark, audio, video {
 
time, mark, audio, video {
Line 125: Line 125:
  
 
<hr>
 
<hr>
 
 
 
     <nav class="nav nav-tabs" id="myTab" role="tablist" style="margin-top: -114px; padding-top: 114px">
 
     <nav class="nav nav-tabs" id="myTab" role="tablist" style="margin-top: -114px; padding-top: 114px">
  
       <a onClick="showTab('simbio')" class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-simio-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-simbio" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-simbio" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Multicellular Modelling: Simbiotics</a>
+
       <a class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-simio-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-simbio" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-simbio" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Multicellular Modelling: Simbiotics</a>
  
       <a onClick="showTab('DOE')" class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-DOE-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-DOE" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-DOE" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Cell Free Protein Synthesis Systems Optimisation</a>
+
       <a class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-DOE-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-DOE" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-DOE" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Cell Free Protein Synthesis Systems Optimisation</a>
  
       <a onClick="showTab('Micro')" class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-Micro-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-Micro" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-Micro" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Microfluidic Agent-Based Model</a>
+
       <a class="nav-item nav-link" id="nav-Micro-tab" data-toggle="tab" href="#nav-Micro" role="tab" aria-controls="nav-Micro" aria-selected="false" style="font-weight:normal; font-size: 0.8em">Microfluidic Agent-Based Model</a>
 
</nav>
 
</nav>
  
Line 355: Line 353:
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
     
 
      <hr>
 
  
  
    <div class="tab-content" id="nav-tabContent">
 
 
       <div class="tab-pane fade" id="nav-DOE" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="nav-DOE-tab">
 
       <div class="tab-pane fade" id="nav-DOE" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="nav-DOE-tab">
  
  
     
+
 
 
       <h2 id="doe" style="font-family: Rubik; padding-top: 114px; margin-top: -114px; margin-bottom: 2%">Cell Free Protein Synthesis Systems Optimisation: Design of Experiments (JMP)</h2>
 
       <h2 id="doe" style="font-family: Rubik; padding-top: 114px; margin-top: -114px; margin-bottom: 2%">Cell Free Protein Synthesis Systems Optimisation: Design of Experiments (JMP)</h2>
  
Line 383: Line 378:
 
       </br></br>
 
       </br></br>
 
       The specific aims for this section of the project were: (i) to demonstrate the applicability of DoE to determine important components of the supplement solution premix, and (ii) to demonstrate the ability of DoE to predict concentrations of CFPS supplements which yield optimal protein synthesis activity.</p>
 
       The specific aims for this section of the project were: (i) to demonstrate the applicability of DoE to determine important components of the supplement solution premix, and (ii) to demonstrate the ability of DoE to predict concentrations of CFPS supplements which yield optimal protein synthesis activity.</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Background Information</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Background Information</h3>
 
       <p>Traditionally, biologists tend to use One Factor At a Time (OFAT) approaches to determine the effect and importance of factors on a system, which can sometimes be a poor method. By only determining the effect that a single factor has on a system at a time, important interactions can be missed. For example, removing only factor A may have no effect, and removing only factor B may also have no effect, but removing both may cause an adverse effect. Therefore, it is important to take a multifactorial approach when investigating the importance of conditions or components of a system, or when trying to optimise a system. An issue with this approach is that a large number of experiments may be required to fully investigate all factors. By using statistical methods, a Design of Experiments (DoE) can be determined which has the minimum number of experiments required to explore questions such as the importance of factors in a system. This approach also allows for robustness testing or determining batch-batch variation (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). As discussed <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:Newcastle/Results#nav-cellfree-tab">here</a>, CFPS systems can be plagued with issues rising from variation, so this approach offers a method to investigate the causes. It could also be used to determine less important components of the supplement solution premix which is added to CFPS systems, and hence a minimal supplement premix could be determined.
 
       <p>Traditionally, biologists tend to use One Factor At a Time (OFAT) approaches to determine the effect and importance of factors on a system, which can sometimes be a poor method. By only determining the effect that a single factor has on a system at a time, important interactions can be missed. For example, removing only factor A may have no effect, and removing only factor B may also have no effect, but removing both may cause an adverse effect. Therefore, it is important to take a multifactorial approach when investigating the importance of conditions or components of a system, or when trying to optimise a system. An issue with this approach is that a large number of experiments may be required to fully investigate all factors. By using statistical methods, a Design of Experiments (DoE) can be determined which has the minimum number of experiments required to explore questions such as the importance of factors in a system. This approach also allows for robustness testing or determining batch-batch variation (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). As discussed <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:Newcastle/Results#nav-cellfree-tab">here</a>, CFPS systems can be plagued with issues rising from variation, so this approach offers a method to investigate the causes. It could also be used to determine less important components of the supplement solution premix which is added to CFPS systems, and hence a minimal supplement premix could be determined.
 
       </br></br>
 
       </br></br>
 
       There are several different types of DoE designs. One of these is the screening design (SD), which is used to create experimental designs to determine the factors with the highest effect on a system. Another design is the surface response design (SRD), which makes experimental designs to collect data for generating models which can predict optimal settings for many factors (SAS Institute Inc., 2016). Software tools, such as JMP (SAS Institute Inc., 2016), can assist in creating these experimental designs.</p>
 
       There are several different types of DoE designs. One of these is the screening design (SD), which is used to create experimental designs to determine the factors with the highest effect on a system. Another design is the surface response design (SRD), which makes experimental designs to collect data for generating models which can predict optimal settings for many factors (SAS Institute Inc., 2016). Software tools, such as JMP (SAS Institute Inc., 2016), can assist in creating these experimental designs.</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Screening Design for Salt Supplements</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Screening Design for Salt Supplements</h3>
 
       <p>Previous research has shown that the concentration of certain salts in the CFPS supplement premix are crucial for maximal protein synthesis activity [REF]. A Design of Experiments approach was used to determine which of the four salts (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, sodium oxalate, and ammonium acetate) are the most important using the JMP software. A classical screening design was created with all four salts as continuous factors and CFPS activity as the response to be maximised. A concentration of ‘0’ was used as the lower limit for each factor, and the concentration used normally in CFPS supplement premixes was used as the upper limit (Figure 1). The screening design generated is shown in table 1.
 
       <p>Previous research has shown that the concentration of certain salts in the CFPS supplement premix are crucial for maximal protein synthesis activity [REF]. A Design of Experiments approach was used to determine which of the four salts (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, sodium oxalate, and ammonium acetate) are the most important using the JMP software. A classical screening design was created with all four salts as continuous factors and CFPS activity as the response to be maximised. A concentration of ‘0’ was used as the lower limit for each factor, and the concentration used normally in CFPS supplement premixes was used as the upper limit (Figure 1). The screening design generated is shown in table 1.
Line 435: Line 430:
 
</table>
 
</table>
  
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Surface Response Designs for Salt Supplements</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Surface Response Designs for Salt Supplements</h3>
 
       <p>The DoE software, JMP, was used to create a surface response design (SRD) for the three salts which were found by the screening design to have the most effect on CFPS activity (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, and sodium oxalate). Ammonium acetate was kept at the default concentration and was not varied. Four SRDs were created using JMP; Central Composite Design-Uniform Precision design (CCD-UP), Box-Behnken (BB), Central Composite Design-Orthogonal (CCD-O), and Central Composite Design (CCD). The design diagnostics feature was used to compare the designs (Figure 4). Specifically, the colour map on correlations, power analysis for each factor and interaction, D, G, and A efficiencies, average variance of prediction, and number of reactions were compared to determine which design would be used. The colour map on correlations shows how correlated two terms are (red is highly correlated, blue is highly un-correlated). The more correlated two terms are, the more difficult it is to determine which is responsible for the effect on the response (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). As would be expected, in each design, terms are highly correlated with themselves (observed as a diagonal red line). Other terms are generally very lowly correlated with different terms. For the CCD-UP, BB, and CCD, the terms at the bottom right of the map have correlations above 0. For CCD-UP and BB, these correlations are still very low, but for CCD they are at about 0.5. Power analysis shows the likelihood of detecting an active effect for terms in the design (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). The CCD-O had a higher Power for all terms, with CCD-UP having the next highest. BB and CCD had lower Power for all terms, but some terms were higher in the BB design than the CC design, and some higher in CC design than the BB design.
 
       <p>The DoE software, JMP, was used to create a surface response design (SRD) for the three salts which were found by the screening design to have the most effect on CFPS activity (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, and sodium oxalate). Ammonium acetate was kept at the default concentration and was not varied. Four SRDs were created using JMP; Central Composite Design-Uniform Precision design (CCD-UP), Box-Behnken (BB), Central Composite Design-Orthogonal (CCD-O), and Central Composite Design (CCD). The design diagnostics feature was used to compare the designs (Figure 4). Specifically, the colour map on correlations, power analysis for each factor and interaction, D, G, and A efficiencies, average variance of prediction, and number of reactions were compared to determine which design would be used. The colour map on correlations shows how correlated two terms are (red is highly correlated, blue is highly un-correlated). The more correlated two terms are, the more difficult it is to determine which is responsible for the effect on the response (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). As would be expected, in each design, terms are highly correlated with themselves (observed as a diagonal red line). Other terms are generally very lowly correlated with different terms. For the CCD-UP, BB, and CCD, the terms at the bottom right of the map have correlations above 0. For CCD-UP and BB, these correlations are still very low, but for CCD they are at about 0.5. Power analysis shows the likelihood of detecting an active effect for terms in the design (Anderson & Whitcomb, 2010). The CCD-O had a higher Power for all terms, with CCD-UP having the next highest. BB and CCD had lower Power for all terms, but some terms were higher in the BB design than the CC design, and some higher in CC design than the BB design.
Line 526: Line 521:
  
 
</p>
 
</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
  
  
 
</div>
 
</div>
     
 
      <hr>
 
  
    <div class="tab-content" id="nav-tabContent">
 
 
       <div class="tab-pane fade" id="nav-Micro" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="nav-Micro-tab">
 
       <div class="tab-pane fade" id="nav-Micro" role="tabpanel" aria-labelledby="nav-Micro-tab">
  
     
+
 
 
       <h2 id="mf" style="font-family: Rubik; padding-top: 114px; margin-top: -114px; margin-bottom: 2%">Microfluidic Agent-Based Model</h2>
 
       <h2 id="mf" style="font-family: Rubik; padding-top: 114px; margin-top: -114px; margin-bottom: 2%">Microfluidic Agent-Based Model</h2>
  
 
       <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/d/db/Newcastle-mf-software.gif" class="img-fluid mx-auto d-block" style="margin: 2%">
 
       <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/d/db/Newcastle-mf-software.gif" class="img-fluid mx-auto d-block" style="margin: 2%">
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Motivation and Aim</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Motivation and Aim</h3>
 
       <p>Digital microfluidics is an area of study intersecting biology, computer science, electronics and several different engineering disciplines. The technology has seen a number of advances and improvements over recent years, with the dream of a “lab on a chip” inching ever closer. Digital microfluidic devices satisfy the requirements of our project very well as they allow the process of switching modular components to be automated.
 
       <p>Digital microfluidics is an area of study intersecting biology, computer science, electronics and several different engineering disciplines. The technology has seen a number of advances and improvements over recent years, with the dream of a “lab on a chip” inching ever closer. Digital microfluidic devices satisfy the requirements of our project very well as they allow the process of switching modular components to be automated.
 
       The aim of creating this model is to create software to be used alongside microfluidic devices to continue the theme of automation of production of modular components in the project.</p>
 
       The aim of creating this model is to create software to be used alongside microfluidic devices to continue the theme of automation of production of modular components in the project.</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Why Digital Microfluidics?</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Why Digital Microfluidics?</h3>
 
       <p>The motivation behind working on a project creating software for digital microfluidics over other microfluidic techniques stems from the numerous advantages that it confers over a more traditional setting involving continuous flow microfluidics. The most basic of these advantages is very simple in that it allows for a reduction in consumed reagents and samples. A natural bonus of this is the expenses saved in using lower quantities of reagents. This also offers another less obvious advantage in that as other microfluidic techniques have shown, a lower reagent volume causes a faster overall result (Whitesides, 2006). The comparatively larger surface to volume ratio which can be achieved with the droplets also aids the speed with which reactions can occur. (Haeberle and Zengerle, 2007). As such, when dealing with single droplets of reagents, as is always the case in a digital microfluidic setting, digital microfluidic technologies are therefore able to achieve results faster than is otherwise possible.
 
       <p>The motivation behind working on a project creating software for digital microfluidics over other microfluidic techniques stems from the numerous advantages that it confers over a more traditional setting involving continuous flow microfluidics. The most basic of these advantages is very simple in that it allows for a reduction in consumed reagents and samples. A natural bonus of this is the expenses saved in using lower quantities of reagents. This also offers another less obvious advantage in that as other microfluidic techniques have shown, a lower reagent volume causes a faster overall result (Whitesides, 2006). The comparatively larger surface to volume ratio which can be achieved with the droplets also aids the speed with which reactions can occur. (Haeberle and Zengerle, 2007). As such, when dealing with single droplets of reagents, as is always the case in a digital microfluidic setting, digital microfluidic technologies are therefore able to achieve results faster than is otherwise possible.
Line 552: Line 544:
 
       </br></br>
 
       </br></br>
 
       When creating the programs both for the system to operate from and to simulate the system, an agent-based approach to modelling was used. An agent-based system is one in which each entity in the system is considered its own unique “agent”, where each agent of the same type holds the same properties but each with their own values. An agent-based system assesses the effects on the system as a whole by observing each individual agent and monitoring their own actions and their interactions with other agents (Macal and North, 2010). In a synthetic biology context, agent based models have been used to model the discrete elements of different systems and are able to capture even some of the most minor differences between agents inside the system. (Gorochowski, 2016).</p>
 
       When creating the programs both for the system to operate from and to simulate the system, an agent-based approach to modelling was used. An agent-based system is one in which each entity in the system is considered its own unique “agent”, where each agent of the same type holds the same properties but each with their own values. An agent-based system assesses the effects on the system as a whole by observing each individual agent and monitoring their own actions and their interactions with other agents (Macal and North, 2010). In a synthetic biology context, agent based models have been used to model the discrete elements of different systems and are able to capture even some of the most minor differences between agents inside the system. (Gorochowski, 2016).</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Simulator Software</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Simulator Software</h3>
 
       <p>The goal of this section of the project is to create a piece of scalable real-time software capable of simulating the full functionality of our EWOD microfluidic device. It should additionally be able to schedule its own microfluidic operation sets to simulate. This program will then allow for a controller on the hardware device to enact the given schedule, whereby a set of operations can be carried out on the chip. These operations can be customised according to the individual capabilities of the version of hardware being used. This therefore has extended capabilities configurable to the breadth of operations of the device being simulated, including more complex operations in the field of digital microfluidics such as mixing and extensibility for zones capable of manipulating temperature. The software provides a separate but fundamentally similar interface alongside that which the chip will be running, creating a simulator able to mimic the effects of running a process on the chip. This serves as an inexpensive and rapid means of testing a real EWOD system.
 
       <p>The goal of this section of the project is to create a piece of scalable real-time software capable of simulating the full functionality of our EWOD microfluidic device. It should additionally be able to schedule its own microfluidic operation sets to simulate. This program will then allow for a controller on the hardware device to enact the given schedule, whereby a set of operations can be carried out on the chip. These operations can be customised according to the individual capabilities of the version of hardware being used. This therefore has extended capabilities configurable to the breadth of operations of the device being simulated, including more complex operations in the field of digital microfluidics such as mixing and extensibility for zones capable of manipulating temperature. The software provides a separate but fundamentally similar interface alongside that which the chip will be running, creating a simulator able to mimic the effects of running a process on the chip. This serves as an inexpensive and rapid means of testing a real EWOD system.
 
       </br></br>
 
       </br></br>
 
       In order to serve a real purpose, the simulation software must not simply function correctly but also provide a simple, fast means of displaying, logging and outputting the information it processes. As such the software must not only be correct, verified, and validated, but also intuitive both to extend and use the full range of the base functionality. This introduces a key component of human-computer interaction to the task whereby the software must be able to cater to the precise needs of the user. It must also be possible to tailor it accordingly.</p>
 
       In order to serve a real purpose, the simulation software must not simply function correctly but also provide a simple, fast means of displaying, logging and outputting the information it processes. As such the software must not only be correct, verified, and validated, but also intuitive both to extend and use the full range of the base functionality. This introduces a key component of human-computer interaction to the task whereby the software must be able to cater to the precise needs of the user. It must also be possible to tailor it accordingly.</p>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Agent-Based Modelling</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Agent-Based Modelling</h3>
 
       <p>The use of an agent-based system for this task is advantageous in a number of key areas. Agent-based systems excel in giving a very clear idea of how the properties of an individual are affecting the greater system, especially when individuals are heterogeneous (Bonabeau, 2002). In this project for example, if scheduling is not optimal for a chip layout then there may be significant bottlenecking in a particular area. Bottlenecking is an example of emergent phenomena in that it can only occur as a result of the properties of many individuals. With only access to the behaviour of the entire system, it can be very difficult to determine the cause of a bottleneck. With an agent based approach however, and analysis of several individuals in the affected area, the cause of the problem will in most cases quickly become apparent. Another advantage of using an agent-based system for this project is that we are also implementing the scheduling for the software. Our scheduling system requires knowledge of each of the individual droplets in the system, and it must also be able to predict their movements for a certain period of time into the future. Computationally we are therefore already expending time and resources upon acquiring and manipulating these data sets and as such it makes sense to extend this knowledge into the agent-based model.</p>
 
       <p>The use of an agent-based system for this task is advantageous in a number of key areas. Agent-based systems excel in giving a very clear idea of how the properties of an individual are affecting the greater system, especially when individuals are heterogeneous (Bonabeau, 2002). In this project for example, if scheduling is not optimal for a chip layout then there may be significant bottlenecking in a particular area. Bottlenecking is an example of emergent phenomena in that it can only occur as a result of the properties of many individuals. With only access to the behaviour of the entire system, it can be very difficult to determine the cause of a bottleneck. With an agent based approach however, and analysis of several individuals in the affected area, the cause of the problem will in most cases quickly become apparent. Another advantage of using an agent-based system for this project is that we are also implementing the scheduling for the software. Our scheduling system requires knowledge of each of the individual droplets in the system, and it must also be able to predict their movements for a certain period of time into the future. Computationally we are therefore already expending time and resources upon acquiring and manipulating these data sets and as such it makes sense to extend this knowledge into the agent-based model.</p>
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div>
     
+
 
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
 
       <p>Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modelling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Supplement 3), pp.7280-7287.
 
       <p>Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modelling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Supplement 3), pp.7280-7287.

Revision as of 23:09, 31 October 2017

spacefill

Our Models

For our project, we built three types of models. The first was an agent-based model which simulated our multicellular biosensor framework. This model gave insight into the optimal ratio of cell-types to have in the system. This information was used during experimental characterisation to optimise our system.

Our second model was a statistical, multifactorial Design of Experiments (DoE) approach towards optimising Cell-Free Protein Synthesis (CFPS) systems. This statistical model was used to generate an experimental design to gather data on the importance of certain supplements in CFPS systems, and then use the experimental data to optimise CFPS systems.

Our third model was an agent-based model designed to replicate the functions of a digital microfluidic chip and schedule the tasks for the device. The final piece of software controls agents which are the microfluidic droplets and moves them around the simulated chip according to predefined movement plans which can be read from either the program itself or custom external files. This provides a quicker, more inexpensive means of testing the chip than repeated real-world experiments.


References

Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modelling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Supplement 3), pp.7280-7287.

Gong, J. and Kim, C. (2008). All-electronic droplet generation on-chip with real-time feedback control for EWOD digital microfluidics. Lab on a Chip, 8(6), p.898.

Gorochowski, T. (2016). Agent-based modelling in synthetic biology. Essays In Biochemistry, 60(4), pp.325-336.

Haeberle, S. and Zengerle, R. (2007). Microfluidic platforms for lab-on-a-chip applications. Lab on a Chip, 7(9), p.1094.

Liu, Y., Banerjee, A. and Papautsky, I. (2014). Precise droplet volume measurement and electrode-based volume metering in digital microfluidics. Microfluidics and Nanofluidics, 17(2), pp.295-303.

Macal, C. and North, M. (2010). Tutorial on agent-based modelling and simulation. Journal of Simulation, 4(3), pp.151-162.

Whitesides, G. (2006). The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature, 442(7101), pp.368-373.