The Influence of the Aortic Root Geometry on Flow Characteristics of a Prosthetic Heart Valve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, performance of aortic heart valve prosthesis in different geometries of the aortic root is investigated experimentally. The objective of this investigation is to establish a set of parameters, which are associated with abnormal flow patterns due to the flow through a prosthetic heart valve implanted in the patients that had certain types of valve diseases prior to the valve replacement. Specific valve diseases were classified into two clinical categories and were correlated with the corresponding changes in aortic root geometry while keeping the aortic base diameter fixed. These categories correspond to aortic valve stenosis and aortic valve insufficiency. The control case that corresponds to the aortic root of a patient without valve disease was used as a reference. Experiments were performed at test conditions corresponding to 70 beats/min, 5.5 L/min target cardiac output, and a mean aortic pressure of 100 mmHg. By varying the aortic root geometry, while keeping the diameter of the orifice constant, it was possible to investigate corresponding changes in the levels of Reynolds shear stress and establish the possibility of platelet activation and, as a result of that, the formation of blood clots.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".