Modeling and System Identification of Arterial Hemodynamics in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks to determine the validity of two distinct tube-load models relating central aortic blood pressure to peripheral blood pressure in humans. Specifically a single-tube model (1-TL) and a serially connected two-tube (2-TL) model, both terminating in a Windkessel load, are considered as representations of the central aortic-peripheral arterial path. The validity and fidelity of the two models was assessed and compared quantitatively by fitting central aortic, radial and femoral blood pressures collected from 8 patients. Both models fitted the BP waveform pairs effectively, and were capable of estimating pulse travel time (PTT) accurately; also the model derived frequency responses were close to the empiric transfer function estimates derived from central and peripheral BP measurements. The 2-TL model was consistently better than 1-TL with statistical significance in terms of accuracy of the central aortic BP waveform, the average waveform RMSE were 2.52 mmHg versus 3.24 mmHg respectively (p<0.05).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".