MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971008460 · doi:10.3791/50314

Micro-particle Image Velocimetry for Velocity Profile Measurements of Micro Blood Flows

2013· article· en· W1971008460 on OpenAlexafffund
Katie L. Pitts, Marianne Fenech

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood properties and coagulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle image velocimetryVelocimetryMechanicsShear rateParticle tracking velocimetryNon-Newtonian fluidSuspension (topology)Particle (ecology)Newtonian fluidMaterials scienceSeedingVolumetric flow rateFlow velocityPhysicsOpticsFlow (mathematics)RheologyTurbulenceGeologyMathematicsThermodynamicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Micro-particle image velocimetry (μPIV) is used to visualize paired images of micro particles seeded in blood flows. The images are cross-correlated to give an accurate velocity profile. A protocol is presented for μPIV measurements of blood flows in microchannels. At the scale of the microcirculation, blood cannot be considered a homogeneous fluid, as it is a suspension of flexible particles suspended in plasma, a Newtonian fluid. Shear rate, maximum velocity, velocity profile shape, and flow rate can be derived from these measurements. Several key parameters such as focal depth, particle concentration, and system compliance, are presented in order to ensure accurate, useful data along with examples and representative results for various hematocrits and flow conditions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicBlood properties and coagulationFrench-language works237,207