Red blood cell clustering in Poiseuille microcapillary flow
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Red blood cells (RBC) flowing in microcapillaries tend to associate into clusters, i.e., small trains of cells separated from each other by a distance comparable to cell size. This process is usually attributed to slower RBCs acting to create a sequence of trailing cells. Here, based on the first systematic investigation of collective RBC flow behavior in microcapillaries in vitro by high-speed video microscopy and numerical simulations, we show that RBC size polydispersity within the physiological range does not affect cluster stability. Lower applied pressure drops and longer residence times favor larger RBC clusters. A limiting cluster length, depending on the number of cells in a cluster, is found by increasing the applied pressure drop. The insight on the mechanism of RBC clustering provided by this work can be applied to further our understanding of RBC aggregability, which is a key parameter implicated in clotting and thrombus formation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it