Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Contactless Precision Steering of Particles in a Fluid inside a Cube with Rotating Walls

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A feedback policy trained on simulated Stokes flow steers two sinking beads to targets in a real cube stirred by five rotating disks.

desk verdict Real hardware demo of ODIL steering for one or two settling beads in a rotating-disk cube; the central precision claim needs replication before it is more than a single-shot proof of concept. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.15958 v1 pith:ETCGIKLN submitted 2025-06-19 physics.flu-dyn cs.LGcs.RO

Lucas Amoudruz , Petr Karnakov , Petros Koumoutsakos This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyncs.LGcs.RO
keywords contactlessmanipulationflowcontrolStokesrotatingdisksfeedbackpolicymulti-particletrappingsedimentationneuralnetwork
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper establishes that flow alone can be used as a contactless, multi-particle tweezer: a cube of glycerol with five rotating disks on its walls, driven by a learned feedback policy, carries one or two millimeter-sized beads to prescribed positions. The claim is demonstrated both in numerical simulation of the Stokes equations and in a physical device, where two sinking beads are trapped, swapped, and rotated as a pair, arriving within 10 percent of the chamber dimension. The value of the approach is that it avoids the concentrated forces, heating, and specialized hardware of optical, acoustic, or magnetic tweezers, and it extends to several particles at once using only five control inputs plus gravity.

What carries the argument

The device works in the Stokes regime (Reynolds number about 0.15), so the total flow is the linear superposition of five precomputed single-disk velocity fields: $U(x,\omega)=\sum_{k=0}^{4}(\omega_k/\omega_{\mathrm{ref}})U_k(x)$. Particle motion is modeled by $\dot{x}=U(x,\omega)-v_{\mathrm{sed}}e_z$, with a constant sedimentation velocity for dense beads. Control is provided by a feedforward neural network that maps bead positions to the five disk angular velocities, trained with a differentiable-loss framework that puts the discretized particle-ODE residuals and the time-to-target objective into a single loss and optimizes trajectories and policy weights together. A multigrid representation of the time trajectories is what makes the joint optimization converge.

What would settle it

With the motors off, release a single sinking bead from many locations across the chamber and track its descent; if the measured settling speed changes with distance to the walls or bottom, the model in the particle equation mispredicts trajectories there, and the claimed point-target accuracy for dense beads must be rechecked on starts near boundaries.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a single control policy, trained end-to-end by minimizing one loss that combines discretized Stokes-flow equations, a travel-time penalty, and terminal position constraints, can move multiple beads to prescribed targets in a cube stirred by five rotating disks. In the strongest demonstration, two sinking beads in the physical device reach swapped targets within a distance below 10% of the chamber dimensions, using the same policy that first trapped them. The paper also shows a structural reason for this success: neutrally buoyant beads are confined to a two-dimensional reachable manifold under this geometry and can only be brought to lines through the center, whereas gravity gives dense beads an extra degree of freedom, making point targets reachable.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that a sinking bead falls at one constant speed everywhere in the cube, with no slowing or sideways drift near walls, disks, or the free surface; the paper states this simplification but does not verify it experimentally.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same policy can trap two sinking beads in place, swap their positions, and rotate the pair around a vertical axis, each within about 30–50 seconds and with terminal error below 10% of the chamber length.
  • Because the policy transfers from simulation to the physical device despite noisy vision feedback and control-loop delay, training in simulation can replace calibration-heavy experiments for this class of flow-control tasks.
  • Neutrally buoyant beads are restricted to a two-dimensional reachable manifold, so point targets are unreachable for them with this five-disk geometry; dense beads escape that restriction via gravity.
  • With five disks the method fully controlled two beads and guided three beads only to a plane, so the controllability limit scales with actuator count, consistent with the 2N+1 controller-count rule the paper cites from two-dimensional studies.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct extension would replace the constant sedimentation velocity with a position-dependent settling speed measured in the real device; this would test whether the sub-10% targeting survives near walls and corners, where the paper's model is weakest.
  • The 2N+1 controllability count cited from two-dimensional studies suggests a design rule for three dimensions: roughly 3N−1 rotating actuators for N dense beads; if that scaling holds, the method's ceiling is set by actuator count, not by the learning algorithm.
  • The same end-to-end loss formulation should work for other position-dependent forces, such as dielectrophoresis or magnetophoresis, whenever a differentiable forward model of particle velocity is available; the rotating-disk device is one instance of a general control template.
  • A quantitative controllability analysis of the five-disk, gravity-assisted geometry would let future work predict how many beads can be steered to points before training, rather than discovering the limit empirically.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper introduces a feedback control method for steering particles in a cubic fluid chamber using five rotating disks. The flow is modeled by linear superposition of precomputed Stokes solutions, and the disk angular velocities are produced by a neural-network policy trained with the ODIL framework, which minimizes a discrete loss combining ODE residuals and travel time. The authors demonstrate in simulation that a single neutrally buoyant bead can reach a line, a single sinking bead can reach a point, two sinking beads can be trapped, swapped, and rotated to prescribed targets, and three beads can reach a plane. The same policies are then deployed on a physical device for the single-bead and two-bead tasks. The paper's central claim is that two beads can be steered simultaneously to predefined positions in the physical device, with swap and rotation tasks reaching their targets within about 10% of the chamber dimensions.

Significance. If the result holds up, this is a valuable proof-of-concept: it demonstrates a learned feedback policy, trained on precomputed Stokes modes, controlling multiple passive tracers in a real fluidic device. The manuscript is unusually transparent about the training procedure, including the ODIL loss, multi-grid trajectory representation, network size, and hyperparameters, and it reports both simulation and physical-device executions for three two-bead tasks. The numerical model is standard and the flow solver Aphros is cited, so the methodology is reproducible in principle. However, the significance is currently tempered by the thin experimental base: the physical swap and rotation demonstrations are single runs, and the sedimentation velocity used in training is neither reported nor verified. The demonstrated capability is real but is not yet characterized as robust.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3, Fig. 6(D-I)] The physical-device evidence for the two-bead swap and rotation tasks consists of a single run per task. The sentence 'the beads successfully reach their new targets within a distance that is below 10% of the chamber dimensions' is presented as a quantitative property of the controller, but no repeated trials, error bars, or failure statistics are reported. As it stands, the 10% figure is a point estimate from one trajectory and cannot support the reliability implied by the abstract's 'advancing robust contactless particle manipulation'. Please either add repeated runs and report statistics, or explicitly restrict the claim to the single demonstrated trajectory.
  2. [Section 2.1, Eq. (2)] The model assumes a constant, position-independent sedimentation velocity v_sed, and the dense-bead control explicitly relies on this additional vertical degree of freedom (Sections 3.2-3.3). Yet the value of v_sed used in training is never reported, and the assumption is not verified against the physical beads, for example by measuring settling speed away from walls and near boundaries. A mismatch between the modeled and actual v_sed would directly bias the planned trajectories. Please report v_sed and either justify the no-wall-effect assumption quantitatively or add a sensitivity analysis.
  3. [Sections 2.2 and 3.3] The simulation tests in Section 3.3 evaluate the trained policy on the same numerical model (Eqs. 1-2) used to generate training data, so they establish generalization over initial bead configurations, not the fidelity of the fluid model to the physical device. The physical experiments provide the independent check, but they are limited to a small number of runs. Consequently, the statement in Section 4 that 'the policy is robust to measurement and modelling errors' is not supported by the evidence presented. Please either provide quantitative robustness tests, such as perturbing v_sed, omega_max, or the feedback noise, or temper the claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.3, rotation task] The sentence 'guiding the beads to their desired positions within a distance that is 10% of the box length in the range of 50 s' is grammatically ambiguous; please specify whether the 10% distance is reached within 50 s or maintained for 50 s.
  2. [Section 3.4 and References] The text contains literal placeholders '(author?)' in references [40], [44], and [45]; these should be corrected before publication.
  3. [Section 2.1] The assumption of a flat, shear-free top surface is stated but its validity for the open glycerol chamber is not discussed; a brief justification or a note on its expected effect would help the reader assess the modeling uncertainty.
  4. [Figure 6 caption] The caption for the distance-to-target panels (C, F, I) does not specify whether the plotted distance is for bead 1, bead 2, or both; please clarify in the caption.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: physical experiments provide independent validation; simulation tests are self-consistency checks, not predictions from fitted parameters.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and its central claim rests on physical experiments, not on a self-referential loop. The control policy is trained on a numerical model (Stokes superposition, Eq. 1, and the bead ODE, Eq. 2) using the ODIL framework, and the in-simulation tests use the same model; however, these tests only check generalization to new initial conditions and are explicitly complemented by deployment on a physical device (Secs. 3.1-3.3, Figs. 2, 4, 6). The swap/rotate claim ('below 10% of the chamber dimensions') is an experimental measurement, not a quantity fitted or defined into the model. The sedimentation velocity v_sed is an assumed input (Eq. 2) rather than a parameter fitted to the experimental outcomes, so no 'fitted input called prediction' pattern applies. Citations to prior ODIL and flow-solver work by the same authors are methodological references; the paper's equations and device experiments, not those citations alone, carry the argument. The single-run nature of the physical swap/rotate demonstrations is a statistical-evidence limitation, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard low-Reynolds-number hydrodynamics plus a few specific modeling choices (passive tracers, flat surface, constant sedimentation). The most significant free input is v_sed, whose value is undisclosed. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • v_sed (sedimentation velocity) = not reported
    Enters the bead ODE (Eq. 2). Assumed constant, ignoring wall effects. Must be known to train sinking-bead policies; its value is never given or independently measured.
  • lambda (ODIL loss weight) = 0.001 initial, halved every 1000 epochs
    Hand-chosen scalarization weight in the loss (Eq. 6). Affects the trade-off between path accuracy and time but is not fitted to physical data.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Stokes flow with linear superposition of disk-induced fields (Eq. 1)
    Assumes low Reynolds number (Re ~ 0.15), negligible inertia, and that the flow from each rotating disk adds linearly.
  • domain assumption Beads are passive tracers: no inertia, no interaction, no wall effects (Eq. 2)
    The paper states beads are small, but does not justify neglecting bead-bead and bead-wall interactions, especially at the 10% distance tolerance.
  • domain assumption Flat free surface with zero normal velocity, tangential slip allowed
    Used in the numerical model; the physical free surface may deform slightly under disk rotation.
  • domain assumption Constant sedimentation velocity for sinking beads
    Assumes gravity-driven settling is uniform and unaffected by walls or bead position (Eq. 2, used in Sections 3.2-3.3).
  • ad hoc to paper ODIL loss formulation yields a policy that generalizes to the physical device
    The neural policy is trained on simulation data and deployed on the device; the sim-to-real transfer is assumed to hold despite unmodeled noise and delay.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Contactless Precision Steering of Particles in a Fluid inside a Cube with Rotating Walls." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ETCGIKLN

@misc{pith2026250615958,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Contactless Precision Steering of Particles in a Fluid inside a Cube with Rotating Walls},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ETCGIKLN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.15958}
}
read the original abstract

Contactless manipulation of small objects is essential for biomedical and chemical applications, such as cell analysis, assisted fertilisation, and precision chemistry. Established methods, including optical, acoustic, and magnetic tweezers, are now complemented by flow control techniques that use flow-induced motion to enable precise and versatile manipulation. However, trapping multiple particles in fluid remains a challenge. This study introduces a novel control algorithm capable of steering multiple particles in flow. The system uses rotating disks to generate flow fields that transport particles to precise locations. Disk rotations are governed by a feedback control policy based on the Optimising a Discrete Loss (ODIL) framework, which combines fluid dynamics equations with path objectives into a single loss function. Our experiments, conducted in both simulations and with the physical device, demonstrate the capability of the approach to transport two beads simultaneously to predefined locations, advancing robust contactless particle manipulation for biomedical applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.15958 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (A) Physical device, composed of the fluid chamber, 5 rotating disks, and 2 cameras. (B) Schematic of the device: disks rotate to create a flow that transports the beads. (C) The control policy maps the position of the beads to the disks angular velocities. (D-F) Flow streaklines produced by the rotation of the bottom disk (D), the back left disk (E), and both bottom and back left disks (F). The two front disks are … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Single neutrally buoyant bead reaching a line. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Final positions of a neutrally buoyant bead following a random policy. The bead starts [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Single bead with a higher density than the fluid, reaching a point. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Trajectories of two beads following the trained policy in simulations. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Physical device performing three tasks: trapping beads at prescribed locations ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Three buoyant beads reaching a plane (yellow) when following a policy trained for this [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Single-cell analysis of circulating tumor cells as a window into tumor heterogeneity

    David T Miyamoto, David T Ting, Mehmet Toner, Shyamala Maheswaran, and Daniel A Haber. Single-cell analysis of circulating tumor cells as a window into tumor heterogeneity. In Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology, volume 81, pages 269–274. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Three-dimensional manipulation of single cells using surface acoustic waves.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(6):1522–1527, 2016

    Feng Guo, Zhangming Mao, Yuchao Chen, Zhiwei Xie, James P Lata, Peng Li, Liqiang Ren, Jiayang Liu, Jian Yang, Ming Dao, et al. Three-dimensional manipulation of single cells using surface acoustic waves.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(6):1522–1527, 2016

    2016

  3. [3]

    Micro-electro-mechanical systems mi- crotweezers for the manipulation of bacteria and small particles.Review of Scientific Instru- ments, 75(5):1280–1282, 2004

    SK Jericho, MH Jericho, T Hubbard, and M Kujath. Micro-electro-mechanical systems mi- crotweezers for the manipulation of bacteria and small particles.Review of Scientific Instru- ments, 75(5):1280–1282, 2004

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    Cellular cargo delivery: Toward assisted fertilization by sperm-carrying micromotors

    Mariana Medina-S´ anchez, Lukas Schwarz, Anne K Meyer, Franziska Hebenstreit, and Oliver G Schmidt. Cellular cargo delivery: Toward assisted fertilization by sperm-carrying micromotors. Nano letters, 16(1):555–561, 2016

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Voxelated bioprinting of modular double- network bio-ink droplets.Nature Communications, 15(1):5902, 2024

    Jinchang Zhu, Yi He, Yong Wang, and Li-Heng Cai. Voxelated bioprinting of modular double- network bio-ink droplets.Nature Communications, 15(1):5902, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Droplet microfluidics.Lab on a Chip, 8(2):198–220, 2008

    Shia-Yen Teh, Robert Lin, Lung-Hsin Hung, and Abraham P Lee. Droplet microfluidics.Lab on a Chip, 8(2):198–220, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Observation of a single-beam gradient force optical trap for dielectric particles.Optics letters, 11(5):288–290, 1986

    Arthur Ashkin, James M Dziedzic, John E Bjorkholm, and Steven Chu. Observation of a single-beam gradient force optical trap for dielectric particles.Optics letters, 11(5):288–290, 1986. 12

    work page 1986

  8. [8]

    Microfluidic sorting in an optical lattice.Nature, 426(6965):421–424, 2003

    Michael P MacDonald, Gabriel C Spalding, and Kishan Dholakia. Microfluidic sorting in an optical lattice.Nature, 426(6965):421–424, 2003

    work page 2003

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Nonlinear elastic and viscoelastic defor- mation of the human red blood cell with optical tweezers.Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics, 1(3):169, 2004

    JP Mills, Lan Qie, Ming Dao, CT Lim, and S Suresh. Nonlinear elastic and viscoelastic defor- mation of the human red blood cell with optical tweezers.Molecular & Cellular Biomechanics, 1(3):169, 2004

    2004

  2. [10]

    Optical trapping and integration of semiconductor nanowire assemblies in water.Nature materials, 5(2):97–101, 2006

    Peter J Pauzauskie, Aleksandra Radenovic, Eliane Trepagnier, Hari Shroff, Peidong Yang, and Jan Liphardt. Optical trapping and integration of semiconductor nanowire assemblies in water.Nature materials, 5(2):97–101, 2006

    2006

  3. [11]

    Evidence for localized cell heating induced by infrared optical tweezers.Biophysical journal, 68(5):2137– 2144, 1995

    Y Liu, DK Cheng, GJ Sonek, MW Berns, CF Chapman, and BJ Tromberg. Evidence for localized cell heating induced by infrared optical tweezers.Biophysical journal, 68(5):2137– 2144, 1995

    1995

  4. [12]

    Acoustical tweezers.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89(5):2140– 2143, 1991

    Junru Wu. Acoustical tweezers.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89(5):2140– 2143, 1991

    1991

  5. [13]

    Multi- functional single beam acoustic tweezer for non-invasive cell/organism manipulation and tissue imaging.Scientific reports, 6(1):37554, 2016

    Kwok Ho Lam, Ying Li, Yang Li, Hae Gyun Lim, Qifa Zhou, and Koping Kirk Shung. Multi- functional single beam acoustic tweezer for non-invasive cell/organism manipulation and tissue imaging.Scientific reports, 6(1):37554, 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Effects of acoustic levitation on the development of zebrafish, danio rerio, embryos.Scientific reports, 5(1):13596, 2015

    Maria Sundvik, Heikki J Nieminen, Ari Salmi, Pertti Panula, and Edward Hæggstr¨ om. Effects of acoustic levitation on the development of zebrafish, danio rerio, embryos.Scientific reports, 5(1):13596, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    Acoustic separation of circulating tumor cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(16):4970–4975, 2015

    Peng Li, Zhangming Mao, Zhangli Peng, Lanlan Zhou, Yuchao Chen, Po-Hsun Huang, Cristina I Truica, Joseph J Drabick, Wafik S El-Deiry, Ming Dao, et al. Acoustic separation of circulating tumor cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(16):4970–4975, 2015

    2015

  8. [16]

    Isolation of exosomes from whole blood by integrating acoustics and microfluidics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(40):10584– 10589, 2017

    Mengxi Wu, Yingshi Ouyang, Zeyu Wang, Rui Zhang, Po-Hsun Huang, Chuyi Chen, Hui Li, Peng Li, David Quinn, Ming Dao, et al. Isolation of exosomes from whole blood by integrating acoustics and microfluidics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(40):10584– 10589, 2017

    2017

  9. [17]

    Acoustic tweezers for the life sciences.Nature methods, 15(12):1021–1028, 2018

    Adem Ozcelik, Joseph Rufo, Feng Guo, Yuyang Gu, Peng Li, James Lata, and Tony Jun Huang. Acoustic tweezers for the life sciences.Nature methods, 15(12):1021–1028, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Hydrodynamic tweezers: 1

    Barry R Lutz, Jian Chen, and Daniel T Schwartz. Hydrodynamic tweezers: 1. noncontact trapping of single cells using steady streaming microeddies.Analytical chemistry, 78(15):5429– 5435, 2006

    2006

  11. [19]

    A simple catch: Fluctuations enable hydrodynamic trapping of microrollers by obstacles.Science Advances, 9(10):eade0320, 2023

    Ernest B van der Wee, Brendan C Blackwell, Florencio Balboa Usabiaga, Andrey Sokolov, Isaiah T Katz, Blaise Delmotte, and Michelle M Driscoll. A simple catch: Fluctuations enable hydrodynamic trapping of microrollers by obstacles.Science Advances, 9(10):eade0320, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Electrophoretic manipulation of single dna molecules in nanofabricated capillaries.Lab on a Chip, 4(3):225– 229, 2004

    LC Campbell, MJ Wilkinson, A Manz, P Camilleri, and CJ Humphreys. Electrophoretic manipulation of single dna molecules in nanofabricated capillaries.Lab on a Chip, 4(3):225– 229, 2004. 13

    2004

  13. [21]

    Dielectrophoretic manipulation of particles.IEEE transactions on industry applications, 33(3):660–669, 1997

    Xiao-Bo Wang, Ying Huang, Peter RC Gascoyne, and Frederick F Becker. Dielectrophoretic manipulation of particles.IEEE transactions on industry applications, 33(3):660–669, 1997

    1997

  14. [22]

    A micro- robotic platform actuated by thermocapillary flows for manipulation at the air-water interface

    Franco N Pi˜ nan Basualdo, Aude Bolopion, Micha¨ el Gauthier, and Pierre Lambert. A micro- robotic platform actuated by thermocapillary flows for manipulation at the air-water interface. Science robotics, 6(52):eabd3557, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Measurement of local viscoelasticity and forces in living cells by magnetic tweezers.Biophysical journal, 76(1):573–579, 1999

    Andreas R Bausch, Winfried M¨ oller, and Erich Sackmann. Measurement of local viscoelasticity and forces in living cells by magnetic tweezers.Biophysical journal, 76(1):573–579, 1999

    1999

  16. [24]

    Programmable droplet manipulation by a magnetic-actuated robot.Science advances, 6(7):eaay5808, 2020

    An Li, Huizeng Li, Zheng Li, Zhipeng Zhao, Kaixuan Li, Mingzhu Li, and Yanlin Song. Programmable droplet manipulation by a magnetic-actuated robot.Science advances, 6(7):eaay5808, 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    Artificial bacterial flagella: Fabrication and magnetic control.Applied Physics Letters, 94(6), 2009

    Li Zhang, Jake J Abbott, Lixin Dong, Bradley E Kratochvil, Dominik Bell, and Bradley J Nelson. Artificial bacterial flagella: Fabrication and magnetic control.Applied Physics Letters, 94(6), 2009

    2009

  18. [26]

    Independent control and path planning of mi- croswimmers with a uniform magnetic field.Advanced Intelligent Systems, 4(3):2100183, 2022

    Lucas Amoudruz and Petros Koumoutsakos. Independent control and path planning of mi- croswimmers with a uniform magnetic field.Advanced Intelligent Systems, 4(3):2100183, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Path planning of magnetic microswimmers in high-fidelity simulations of capillaries with deep reinforcement learning

    Lucas Amoudruz, Sergey Litvinov, and Petros Koumoutsakos. Path planning of magnetic microswimmers in high-fidelity simulations of capillaries with deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02171, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Mobile nanotweezers for active colloidal manipulation

    Souvik Ghosh and Ambarish Ghosh. Mobile nanotweezers for active colloidal manipulation. Science Robotics, 3(14):eaaq0076, 2018

    2018

  21. [29]

    Roadmap for optofluidics.Journal of Optics, 19(9):093003, 2017

    Paolo Minzioni, Roberto Osellame, Cinzia Sada, Shen Zhao, FG Omenetto, Kristinn B Gyl- fason, Tommy Haraldsson, Yibo Zhang, Aydogan Ozcan, Adam Wax, et al. Roadmap for optofluidics.Journal of Optics, 19(9):093003, 2017

    2017

  22. [30]

    A compact dea-based soft peristaltic pump for power and control of fluidic robots.Science robotics, 8(79):eadd4649, 2023

    Siyi Xu, Cara M Nunez, Mohammad Souri, and Robert J Wood. A compact dea-based soft peristaltic pump for power and control of fluidic robots.Science robotics, 8(79):eadd4649, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Algorithm for a microfluidic assembly line.Physical Review Letters, 106(9):094503, 2011

    Tobias M Schneider, Shreyas Mandre, and Michael P Brenner. Algorithm for a microfluidic assembly line.Physical Review Letters, 106(9):094503, 2011

    2011

  24. [32]

    Micro-manipulation using rotational fluid flows induced by remote magnetic micro-manipulators.Journal of Applied Physics, 112(6), 2012

    Zhou Ye, Eric Diller, and Metin Sitti. Micro-manipulation using rotational fluid flows induced by remote magnetic micro-manipulators.Journal of Applied Physics, 112(6), 2012

    2012

  25. [33]

    Soft-robotic ciliated epidermis for reconfigurable coordinated fluid manipulation.Science Advances, 8(34):eabq2345, 2022

    Ziyu Ren, Mingchao Zhang, Shanyuan Song, Zemin Liu, Chong Hong, Tianlu Wang, Xi- aoguang Dong, Wenqi Hu, and Metin Sitti. Soft-robotic ciliated epidermis for reconfigurable coordinated fluid manipulation.Science Advances, 8(34):eabq2345, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Inertial focusing for tumor antigen–dependent and–independent sorting of rare circulating tumor cells.Science translational medicine, 5(179):179ra47–179ra47, 2013

    Emre Ozkumur, Ajay M Shah, Jordan C Ciciliano, Benjamin L Emmink, David T Miyamoto, Elena Brachtel, Min Yu, Pin-i Chen, Bailey Morgan, Julie Trautwein, et al. Inertial focusing for tumor antigen–dependent and–independent sorting of rare circulating tumor cells.Science translat...

    2013

  27. [35]

    Microfluidic, marker- free isolation of circulating tumor cells from blood samples.Nature protocols, 9(3):694–710, 2014

    Nezihi Murat Karabacak, Philipp S Spuhler, Fabio Fachin, Eugene J Lim, Vincent Pai, Emre Ozkumur, Joseph M Martel, Nikola Kojic, Kyle Smith, Pin-i Chen, et al. Microfluidic, marker- free isolation of circulating tumor cells from blood samples.Nature protocols, 9(3):694–710, 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    Deep learning with microfluidics for biotechnology.Trends in biotechnology, 37(3):310–324, 2019

    Jason Riordon, Duˇ san Sovilj, Scott Sanner, David Sinton, and Edmond WK Young. Deep learning with microfluidics for biotechnology.Trends in biotechnology, 37(3):310–324, 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    The past, present and potential for microfluidic reactor technology in chemical synthesis.Na- ture chemistry, 5(11):905–915, 2013

    Katherine S Elvira, Xavier Casadevall i Solvas, Robert CR Wootton, and Andrew J Demello. The past, present and potential for microfluidic reactor technology in chemical synthesis.Na- ture chemistry, 5(11):905–915, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    Ankur Kislaya, Aniket Ashwin Samant, Peter Veenstra, Daniel S. W. Tam, and Jerry Wester- weel. Particle manipulation in hele–shaw flow with programmable hydrodynamics.Physics of Fluids, 37(3):032012, 03 2025

    2025

  31. [39]

    Solving inverse problems in physics by optimizing a discrete loss: Fast and accurate learning without neural networks

    Petr Karnakov, Sergey Litvinov, and Petros Koumoutsakos. Solving inverse problems in physics by optimizing a discrete loss: Fast and accurate learning without neural networks. PNAS nexus, 3(1):pgae005, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Optimal navigation in microflu- idics via the optimization of a discrete loss.Physical Review Letters, 134(4):044001, 2025

    Petr Karnakov, Lucas Amoudruz, and Petros Koumoutsakos. Optimal navigation in microflu- idics via the optimization of a discrete loss.Physical Review Letters, 134(4):044001, 2025

    2025

  33. [41]

    Computing foaming flows across scales: From breaking waves to microfluidics.Science Advances, 8(5):eabm0590, 2022

    Petr Karnakov, Sergey Litvinov, and Petros Koumoutsakos. Computing foaming flows across scales: From breaking waves to microfluidics.Science Advances, 8(5):eabm0590, 2022

    2022

  34. [42]

    Flow reconstruction by multires- olution optimization of a discrete loss with automatic differentiation.The European Physical Journal E, 46(7):59, 2023

    Petr Karnakov, Sergey Litvinov, and Petros Koumoutsakos. Flow reconstruction by multires- olution optimization of a discrete loss with automatic differentiation.The European Physical Journal E, 46(7):59, 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    JAX: composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs, 2018

    James Bradbury, Roy Frostig, Peter Hawkins, Matthew James Johnson, Chris Leary, Dougal Maclaurin, George Necula, Adam Paszke, Jake VanderPlas, Skye Wanderman-Milne, and Qiao Zhang. JAX: composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs, 2018

    2018

  36. [44]

    Geometric control of particle manipulation in a two-dimensional fluid

    Yizhar Or, Joris Vankerschaver, Scott D Kelly, Richard M Murray, and Jerrold E Marsden. Geometric control of particle manipulation in a two-dimensional fluid. InProceedings of the 48h IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) held jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Con...

    2009

  37. [45]

    The control of particles in the stokes limit.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 942:A1, 2022

    Benjamin J Walker, Kenta Ishimoto, Eamonn A Gaffney, and Cl´ ement Moreau. The control of particles in the stokes limit.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 942:A1, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Elsevier, 2000

    Ulrich Trottenberg, Cornelius W Oosterlee, and Anton Schuller.Multigrid. Elsevier, 2000. 15

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.