MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1583760723 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2003.1280509

Cardiac tissue simulation using graphics hardware

2004· article· en· W1583760723 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGraphicsCellular automatonComputer graphicsGraphics hardwareGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsComputer hardwareGraphics processing unitParallel computingComputational scienceComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As video cards become faster and more programmable, physical simulations implemented on graphics processors become possible. This paper examines different programmable stages of the nVidia graphics processor (GPLI), and their use to simulate electrical activation of cells in a tissue sample using a cellular automaton model. Comparable tissue simulation programs were written to run on both the CPU and the GPU. A simple activation rule set was used to provide a base for speed evaluation of the graphics processor vs. a standard personal computer. The results show that a speed increase of 1.6/spl times/ is achieved for simulations of 2048 /spl times/ 2048 cells. CPU's offer a low cost high speed platform to conduct tissue simulations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207