Effect of deformability difference between two erythrocytes on their aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigated the rheology of a doublet that is an aggregate of two red blood cells (RBCs). According to previous studies, most aggregates in blood flow consist of RBC doublet-pairs and thus the understanding of doublet dynamics has scientific importance in describing its hemodynamics. The RBC aggregation tendency can be significantly affected by the cell's deformability which can vary under both physiological and pathological conditions. Hence, we conducted a two-dimensional simulation of doublet dynamics under a simple shear flow condition with different deformability between RBCs. To study the dissociation process of the doublet, we employed the aggregation model described by the Morse-type potential function, which is based on the depletion theory. In addition, we developed a new method of updating fluid property to consider viscosity difference between RBC cytoplasm and plasma. Our results showed that deformability difference between the two RBCs could significantly reduce their aggregating tendency under a shear condition of 50 s(-1), resulting in disaggregation. Since even under physiological conditions, the cell deformability may be significantly different, consideration of the difference in deformability amongst RBCs in blood flow would be needed for the hemodynamic studies based on a numerical approach.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".