Evaluation of effects of selected factors on inter-vertebral fusion—a simulation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study simulated the effects of inter-vertebral disc degeneration and bone density distribution on the structural stiffness and strength provided by inter-vertebral fusion. Based on the original and redistributed bone density distributions, the effects of selected factors, including contact area between device/graft and vertebral endplates, endplate conditions, and bone growth capacity were evaluated using a factorial design of experiment. The simulation results suggested that the degeneration of inter-vertebral disc significantly affected the bone density and density distribution in adjacent vertebrae. The mechanical strength immediately after instrumentation is the worst case of device/graft subsidence. After that procedure, bone will adapt itself to the changed loading conditions and therefore reduce the risk of subsidence. A deficiency in structural stiffness immediately after instrumentation could be the "worst-case scenario" depending on the combinations of selected factors. The simulation results demonstrated that the contact area and initial bone density distribution should be considered jointly while estimating the risk of device/graft subsidence. The endplate condition is a secondary factor on the subsidence risk, compared with the contact area and initial bone density distribution.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".