Regional frequency variation during human ventricular fibrillation
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
Quantifying the regional frequency variation in ventricular fibrillation (VF) may lead to focal strategies in treating human VF. We hypothesized that during human VF there are quantifiable regional frequency variations in the ventricles and they relate to underlying fixed myocardial substrate. In eight myopathic human hearts, we studied 35 VF episodes. The electrograms during VF were acquired simultaneously from the epicardium and endocardium using 2 electrode arrays each consisting of 112 electrodes. Regional characterization was performed using a ratio parameter derived from the dominant frequency analysis of the electrograms. The findings were related to the anatomical substrate using bipolar voltage maps. The results of the analysis indicate that LV had a larger dominant frequency (DF) span than RV (p=0.0111) while there was no significant difference (p=0.1488) in the DF span between LV freewall (FW) and septum (SE). Correlation of areas of abnormal myocardium with the dominant frequency feature matched only in 50% of the cases indicating that ion channel heterogeneity and time-varying physiological factors may play an important role in maintaining VF.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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