Is flow in the common carotid artery fully developed?
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
The assumption of fully developed or axisymmetric velocity profiles in the common carotid artery (CCA) underlies the straightforward estimation of CCA blood flow rates or wall shear stresses (WSS) from limited velocity data, such as spectral peak velocities acquired using Doppler ultrasound. Using an automated velocity profile classifier developed for this study, we characterized the shape of the CCA velocity profile from cine phase contrast magnetic resonance images acquired as part of an Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) ancillary study, here focusing on 45 participants imaged twice as part of a repeatability protocol. When averaged over the cardiac cycle, roughly 60% of the velocity profiles were classified as skewed, with over half of these exhibiting the crescent shape characteristic of strong Dean-type flow in a curved tube. During early diastole, roughly 80% of the velocity profiles were skewed. In most cases the degree and orientation of skewing were reproduced in the repeat scan, indicating the persistence of these flow features. Fully developed flow thus appears to be the exception rather than the rule in the nominally straight CCA. Implications of this for flow rate and WSS estimation, and perhaps the development and progression of carotid atherosclerosis, warrant further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 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