BioCloneBot: A versatile, low-cost, and open-source automated liquid handler

1. Motion—Motion accuracy: not reported
2. Volume—Volumetric accuracy: not reported
3. Viability—Cell viability: not reported
4. Unattended—Unattended operation: not reported
5. Standard—Standard compliance: not reported

The full text was read and states no figure for any of the five.

Each score is shown against the range the other 59 builds actually occupy, because no criterion uses the full 1–5 scale. These describe how reproducible the build is, not how good the science is.

• Resolution

  4/1–5

  After regression correction 5 uL gave 2.60% accuracy and 6.03% precision and 10 uL gave 0.80%/5.17%, while 1-2 uL degrades to 12.5% error and 11.22% CV.

• Throughput

  2/2–5

  Single syringe pump handling one tip and one fluid path at a time with 4-6 labware slots; a syringe swap is needed to change the 1-20/10-200 uL range and thermocycling is manual.

• Parts sourcing

  4/2–4

  Mostly off-the-shelf or kit-based components.

• Skill needed

  4/2–4

  Build/operation described as low-skill or basic assembly.

• Facilities needed

  4/2–4

  Uses common benchtop/desktop equipment or generic consumables.

• Documentation

  5/2–5

  Multiple open resources named: files/code/BOM/protocol documentation.

• Validation effort

  4/2–4

  Gravimetric n=10 at five volumes per syringe, five glycerol viscosities, dial-indicator axis accuracy, a 96-tip test, and cloning products compared with manual pipetting assemblies.

• Cycle time

  1/1–4

  Authors concede speed is a drawback: 96 tip pick and eject cycles took ~1.5 h versus an Opentrons doing plate-to-plate transfers with tip changes in ~35 min.