MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1787859879 · doi:10.1115/sbc2012-80397

A Comprehensive Tool for Patient-Specific AAA Geometry and Biomechanics Assessment

2012· article· en· W1787859879 on OpenAlexaff
Samarth S. Raut, Santanu Chandra, Judy Shum, P. Liu, Elena S. Di Martino, Todd C. Doehring, A. Jana, Ender A. Finol

Bibliographic record

VenueASME 2012 Summer Bioengineering Conference, Parts A and B · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institutes of HealthCarnegie Mellon University
KeywordsBiomechanicsComputer scienceSoftwareMATLABFinite element methodAbdominal aortic aneurysmGeometric modelingBoundary (topology)SegmentationInterface (matter)Artificial intelligenceMedicineEngineeringSurgeryAneurysmMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annual mortality from ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in the United States alone is approximately 150,000, which is currently ranked as the 13th leading cause of death and the 10th leading cause of death in men over 55 years of age [1]. The vascular surgeon needs to weigh the risk of AAA rupture against the risk of surgical intervention to decide the best course of treatment. Several steps are involved when using computational techniques to evaluate risk of rupture [2], namely medical image segmentation, 3D reconstruction, finite element mesh generation, derivation of boundary conditions, specification of tissue material properties, etc. Currently, computational analysis of AAA biomechanics includes the use of multiple third-party commercial software tools to accomplish each of these steps, which makes its clinical implementation impractical, time-consuming and requiring to interface multiple software tools as this demands an engineering skill set. Additionally, the versatility of general purpose off-the-shelf software comes at the cost of simplifying assumptions regarding geometric modeling, limited user control and boundary conditions. This makes subsequent computational results vulnerable to inaccuracies. In this work, we describe the software tool AAAVASC, built on a MATLAB platform, with an integrated approach for image-based modeling and a novel pipeline that facilitates both geometry quantification and computational analysis of AAA biomechanics.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASME 2012 Summer Bioengineering Conference, Parts A and BSame topicAortic aneurysm repair treatmentsFrench-language works237,207