A Comparison of Uniaxial and Biaxial Mechanical Properties of the Annulus Fibrosus: A Porcine Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The annulus fibrosus of the intervertebral disk experiences multidirectional tension in vivo, yet the majority of mechanical property testing has been uniaxial. Therefore, our understanding of how this complex multilayered tissue responds to loading may be deficient. This study aimed to determine the mechanical properties of porcine annular samples under uniaxial and biaxial tensile loading. Two-layer annulus samples were isolated from porcine disks from four locations: anterior superficial, anterior deep, posterior superficial, and posterior deep. These tissues were then subjected to three deformation conditions each to a maximal stretch ratio of 1.23: uniaxial, constrained uniaxial, and biaxial. Uniaxial deformation was applied in the circumferential direction, while biaxial deformation was applied simultaneously in the circumferential and compressive directions. Constrained uniaxial consisted of a stretch ratio of 1.23 in the circumferential direction while holding the tissue stationary in the axial direction. The maximal stress and stress-stretch ratio (S-S) moduli determined from the biaxial tests were significantly higher than those observed during both the uniaxial tests (maximal stress, 97.1% higher during biaxial; p=0.002; S-S moduli, 117.9% higher during biaxial; p=0.0004) and the constrained uniaxial tests (maximal stress, 46.8% higher during biaxial; S-S moduli, 82.9% higher during biaxial). These findings suggest that the annulus is subjected to higher stresses in vivo when under multidirectional tension.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".