Experimental and theoretical ventricular electrograms and their relation to electrophysiological gradients in the adult rat heart
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The electrical activity of adult mouse and rat hearts has been analyzed extensively, often as a prerequisite for genetic engineering studies or for the development of rodent models of human diseases. Some aspects of the initiation and conduction of the cardiac action potential in rodents closely resemble those in large mammals. However, rodents have a much higher heart rate and their ventricular action potential is triangular and very short. As a consequence, an interpretation of the electrocardiogram in the mouse and rat remains difficult and controversial. In this study, optical mapping techniques have been applied to an in vitro left ventricular adult rat preparation to obtain patterns of conduction and action potential duration measurements from the epicardial surface. This information has been combined with previously published mathematical models of the rat ventricular myocyte to develop a bidomain model for action potential propagation and electrogram formation in the rat left ventricle. Important insights into the basis for the repolarization waveform in the ventricular electrogram of the adult rat have been obtained. Notably, our model demonstrated that the biphasic shape of the rat ventricular repolarization wave can be explained in terms of the transmural and apex-to-base gradients in action potential duration that exist in the rat left ventricle.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".