MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2067572626 · doi:10.1121/1.4831474

Cyclic variation of three-dimensional geometry of the rat carotid artery bifurcation assessed by high-frequency ultrasound imaging

2013· article· en· W2067572626 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Changzhu Jin, Kweon-Ho Nam, Tae‐Hoon Bok, Dong‐Guk Paeng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiac cycleCarotid bifurcationBifurcationCommon carotid arteryUltrasoundBlood flowPolygon meshGeometryCardiac imagingBiomedical engineeringMedicineMathematicsCarotid arteriesCardiologyPhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The computational simulation of the interaction between blood flow and arterial wall motion during a cardiac cycle is complicated and requires high quality information of the vessel wall motion in space and time. In this study, a set of cross-sectional ultrasound images was acquired using an electrocardiogram-gated kilohertz visualization mode, which provides 1000 frame images per second, by an ultrasound imaging system (Vevo 770, VisualSonics, Canada) with a probe of 40-MHz central frequency (RMV 704). The three dimensional (3D) geometry of carotid artery bifurcation was reconstructed at systolic and diastolic phases during a cardiac cycle using the cross-sectional ultrasound images, and a block meshing method was applied to the reconstructed 3D geometry. Then, an appropriate hexahedral mesh was constructed for the computational simulation. The 3D geometry measured by high-frequency ultrasound imaging provides high temporal and spatial information on the vessel wall motion during a cardiac cycle, which is important for accurate computational simulation of hemodynamics in the bifurcation area of the carotid artery. The fluid-structure interaction simulation of blood flow in the carotid artery bifurcation during a cardiac cycle is in progress using the meshes of 3D geometry of vessel wall. [Work supported by NIPA-2013-H0401-13-1007 and 2013R1A1A2043478.]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention→French-language works237,207→