MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1959454139 · doi:10.1002/cphy.c100046

Ventilation and Respiratory Mechanics

2012· review· en· W1959454139 on OpenAlexafffund
A. William Sheel, Lee M. Romer

Bibliographic record

VenueComprehensive physiology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRespiratory physiologyVentilation (architecture)Respiratory systemMedicineMechanicsPhysicsInternal medicineThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During dynamic exercise, the healthy pulmonary system faces several major challenges, including decreases in mixed venous oxygen content and increases in mixed venous carbon dioxide. As such, the ventilatory demand is increased, while the rising cardiac output means that blood will have considerably less time in the pulmonary capillaries to accomplish gas exchange. Blood gas homeostasis must be accomplished by precise regulation of alveolar ventilation via medullary neural networks and sensory reflex mechanisms. It is equally important that cardiovascular and pulmonary system responses to exercise be precisely matched to the increase in metabolic requirements, and that the substantial gas transport needs of both respiratory and locomotor muscles be considered. Our article addresses each of these topics with emphasis on the healthy, young adult exercising in normoxia. We review recent evidence concerning how exercise hyperpnea influences sympathetic vasoconstrictor outflow and the effect this might have on the ability to perform muscular work. We also review sex-based differences in lung mechanics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations79
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComprehensive physiologySame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207