The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pros and Cons: Magnetic versus Optical Microrobots
Open accessAbstract
Mobile microrobotics has emerged as a new robotics field within the last decade to create untethered tiny robots that can access and operate in unprecedented, dangerous, or hard‐to‐reach small spaces noninvasively toward disruptive medical, biotechnology, desktop manufacturing, environmental remediation, and other potential applications. Magnetic and optical actuation methods are the most widely used actuation methods in mobile microrobotics currently, in addition to acoustic and biological (cell‐driven) actuation approaches. The pros and cons of these actuation methods are reported here, depending on the given context. They can both enable long‐range, fast, and precise actuation of single or a large number of microrobots in diverse environments. Magnetic actuation has unique potential for medical applications of microrobots inside nontransparent tissues at high penetration depths, while optical actuation is suitable for more biotechnology, lab‐/organ‐on‐a‐chip, and desktop manufacturing types of applications with much less surface penetration depth requirements or with transparent environments. Combining both methods in new robot designs can have a strong potential of combining the pros of both methods. There is still much progress needed in both actuation methods to realize the potential disruptive applications of mobile microrobots in real‐world conditions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Controlling waves in space and time for imaging and focusing in complex media
Mosk, A. P., Lagendijk, A., Lerosey, G., & Fink, M. (2012) · Nature Photonics · doi:10.1038/nphoton.2012.88 · Cited by 1,536
Liquid crystalline elastomers as actuators and sensors
Ohm, C., Brehmer, M., & Zentel, R. (2010) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.200904059 · Cited by 1,169
Cited by
Endovascular Microrobotics for Neurointervention
Santiago-Dieppa, D. R., & Friend, J. (2024) · Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1146/annurev-control-060523-010720 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Sitti, M., & Wiersma, D. S.
- Venue
- Advanced Materials
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-02-13
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- e1906766-e1906766
- ISSN
- 0935-9648 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-4095
- OpenAlex
- W3006284129
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 48.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pros and Cons: Magnetic versus Optical Microrobots. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/adma.201906766
- The paper
- Sitti, M., & Wiersma, D. S. (2020). Pros and Cons: Magnetic versus Optical Microrobots. Advanced Materials. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201906766
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.