Relationship Between Meniscal Sample Swelling and the Compressive Properties of Bovine Menisci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The menisci are anisotropic hydrated connective tissues, situated in the tibiofemoral joint. The menisci transmit approximately 50% of the load across this joint [1, 2]. In this tissue, compression would only be experienced in the axial (vertical) direction, and as such, many studies have tested samples in the axial direction to determine the compressive properties [3–5]. The material behaviour of the menisci has been described as biphasic, meaning the response of the tissue to applied load is time dependent and determined by both the solid constituents and their interaction with the fluid component [3]. Due to the low permeability of the tissue, deformation results in relative movement of the solid matrix and the fluid it contains, resulting in the creation of drag forces between the two phases. Fluid exudation from the matrix governs the viscoelastic behaviour of the tissue, including stress relaxation and creep [6]. The swelling behaviour of meniscal samples in varying osmotic environments was evaluated in our lab (unpublished data), where they swelled significantly, approximately 30% volumetrically in iso-osmotic phosphate buffered saline (PBS). It was hypothesized that the material properties of the tissue would be affected by this significant swelling. To date, no study has evaluated the effect of sample swelling, due to sample preparation and storage, on the behaviour of the menisci in compression. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate this relationship. We hypothesized that meniscal samples would be less stiff and more permeable in a swollen state than when they are compressed to the ‘fresh’, non-swollen, thickness prior to initiation of the protocol.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".