MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outline of the International Organization for Standardization Standard for Circulatory Support Devices (ISO 14708‐5)

2010· article· en· W1672152501 on OpenAlex
Kou Imachi, Tofy Mussivand

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

VenueArtificial Organs · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationCirculatory systemInternational standardizationWork (physics)Computer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringMedicineMechanical engineeringCardiologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid progress of artificial heart and circulatory support devices enables us to apply them to severe heart failure patients. Many types of circulatory support devices have been developed in the United States, Europe, and Japan. This situation urged the establishment of an International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard for the circulatory support devices. A new work, "Cardiac Ventricular Assist Devices," was proposed to the ISO/TC150/SC6 (TC150: Technical Committee of Implants for Surgery, SC6: Sub-committee of Active Implants) in 2000, and the work was finalized for publication at a 2009 meeting of the ISO/TC150 in Kyoto. In this article, the authors would like to introduce the ISO system and the outline of the ISO Standard for Circulatory Support Devices.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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