Relationship between middle cerebral artery blood velocity and end-tidal PCO2 in the hypocapnic-hypercapnic range in humans
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the relationship between cerebral blood flow (CBF) and end-tidal PCO2 (PETCO2) in humans. We used transcranial Doppler ultrasound to determine middle cerebral artery peak blood velocity responses to 14 levels of PETCO2 in a range of 22 to 50 Torr with a constant end-tidal PO2 (100 Torr) in eight subjects. PETCO2 and end-tidal PO2 were controlled by using the technique of dynamic end-tidal forcing combined with controlled hyperventilation. Two protocols were conducted in which PETCO2 was changed by 2 Torr every 2 min from hypocapnia to hypercapnia (protocol I) and vice-versa (protocol D). Over the range of PETCO2 studied, the sensitivity of peak blood velocity to changes in PETCO2 (CBF-PETCO2 sensitivity) was nonlinear with a greater sensitivity in hypercapnia (4.7 and 4.0%/Torr, protocols I and D, respectively) compared with hypocapnia (2.5 and 2.2%/Torr). Furthermore, there was evidence of hysteresis in the CBF-PETCO2 sensitivity; for a given PETCO2, there was greater sensitivity during protocol I compared with protocol D. In conclusion, CBF-PETCO2 sensitivity varies depending on the level of PETCO2 and the protocol that is used. The mechanisms underlying these responses require further investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it