MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971168580 · doi:10.1118/1.2031009

Po‐Poster ‐ 30: A method to estimate an exponential elastic model

2005· article· en· W1971168580 on OpenAlexaff
Hangyu Zhong, Terry M. Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOgdenExpression (computer science)Exponential functionStress (linguistics)Finite element methodApplied mathematicsDeformation (meteorology)MathematicsComputer scienceCalculus (dental)AlgorithmMathematical analysisPhysicsStructural engineeringOrthodonticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The response of soft tissue to interventional actions is an important subject in surgery simulation and planning. With properly calibrated elastic properties, it is possible to build a computational model to predict the deformation and stress of different organs. This paper studies the biomechanical properties of a pig liver and proposes a parameter evaluation method specifically for an exponential constitutive model urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp1009:mp1009-math-0001 which is extensively used in the literature. Under the assumption of the incompressibility, the uniaxial deformation mode allows us to generate a simplified stress expression: urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp1009:mp1009-math-0002 Different from a general trial and error procedure employed when constructing a finite element computational model, here we fit the above simplified stress expression with the experimental curve of stress and strain using a least square method. The fitted result shows that for a sample of a pig liver, b =8.6, C =0.000169 (N/mm 2 ), and A =ln( bC )=−6.53. From the value A we also can deduce Young's module which satisfies E =6 bC under a small strain. Consequently we determine that E =6 e A =0.0088. We then compare the theoretic model with some published data, and find that the exponential model calibrated with this method matches well with both the Ogden model and an experimental result. Therefore the calibrated parameters could serve as a valuable reference in building a computational physics‐based deformable model for surgical simulation and radiation treatment planning.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207