The role of viscoelasticity of collagen fibers in articular cartilage: Theory and numerical formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relative importance of fluid-dependent and fluid-independent transient mechanical behavior in articular cartilage was examined for tensile and unconfined compression testing using a fibril reinforced model. The collagen matrix of articular cartilage was modeled as viscoelastic using a quasi-linear viscoelastic formulation with strain-dependent elastic modulus, while the proteoglycan matrix was considered as linearly elastic. The collagen viscoelastic properties were obtained by fitting experimental data from a tensile test. These properties were used to investigate unconfined compression testing, and the sensitivity of the properties was also explored. It was predicted that the stress relaxation observed in tensile tests was not caused by fluid pressurization at the macroscopic level. A multi-step tensile stress relaxation test could be approximated using a hereditary integral in which the elastic fibrillar modulus was taken to be a linear function of the fibrillar strain. Applying the same formulation to the radial fibers in unconfined compression, stress relaxation could not be simulated if fluid pressurization were absent. Collagen viscoelasticity was found to slightly weaken fluid pressurization in unconfined compression, and this effect was relatively more significant at moderate strain rates. Therefore, collagen viscoelasticity appears to play an import role in articular cartilage in tensile testing, while fluid pressurization dominates the transient mechanical behavior in compression. Collagen viscoelasticity plays a minor role in the mechanical response of cartilage in unconfined compression if significant fluid flow is present.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".