MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983513341 · doi:10.1115/1.1894350

One-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Models of Cerebrovascular Flow

2004· article· en· W1983513341 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanterbury District Health BoardAtlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
KeywordsCircle of WillisEfferentHagen–Poiseuille equationCerebral arteriesCerebral blood flowCerebral autoregulationBlood flowFlow (mathematics)MechanicsAfferentGeologyComputer scienceAnatomyMedicineBlood pressureAutoregulationPhysicsAnesthesiaCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Circle of Willis is a ring-like structure of blood vessels found beneath the hypothalamus at the base of the brain. Its main function is to distribute oxygen-rich arterial blood to the cerebral mass. One-dimensional (1D) and three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models of the Circle of Willis have been created to provide a simulation tool which can potentially be used to identify at-risk cerebral arterial geometries and conditions and replicate clinical scenarios, such as occlusions in afferent arteries and absent circulus vessels. Both models capture cerebral haemodynamic autoregulation using a proportional-integral (PI) controller to modify efferent artery resistances to maintain optimal efferent flow rates for a given circle geometry and afferent blood pressure. The models can be used to identify at-risk cerebral arterial geometries and conditions prior to surgery or other clinical procedures. The 1D model is particularly relevant in this instance, with its fast solution time suitable for real-time clinical decisions. Results show the excellent correlation between models for the transient efferent flux profile. The assumption of strictly Poiseuille flow in the 1D model allows more flow through the geometrically extreme communicating arteries than the 3D model. This discrepancy was overcome by increasing the resistance to flow in the anterior communicating artery in the 1D model to better match the resistance seen in the 3D results.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

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 head0.225
Teacher spread0.204 · 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