A Microfluidic Model for the Migration of Chondrocyte Under Pulsed Electromagnetic Field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) treatment is a potentially non-invasive method for tissue engineering. In this paper, a theoretical model is established to simulate the regeneration of articular cartilage for Osteoarthritis by means of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF). The electrical field, flow field, single particle motion and concentration field during the growth of chondrocyte are obtained by solving the theoretical model numerically, which accounts for cell distribution in the culture dish. The induced electric field strength can be numerically obtained by Maxwell’s equation and then the potential distribution by the Poisson equation and Laplace equation. The chondrocytes can be driven to move once the electric field is built up. In the calculation of the flow field, the continuity and momentum equation are applied to obtain the bulk electroosmotic velocity field which will affect the motion of the charged cell due to viscous drag forces. The motion of a single particle can be obtained by the classic Newton’s second law. In addition to a single particle, the concentration distribution of particles which indicates the migration of chondrocytes can be described by the conservation law of mass. Boundary conditions are required to solve these sets of equations numerically. A comparison between model results and actual experimental data for the growth and migration of chondrocytes is performed. The results presented here allow a better understanding of the role PEMF in the treatment of Osteoarthritis.Copyright © 2005 by ASME
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".