MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081541542 · doi:10.1115/1.2900724

PIV-Measured Versus CFD-Predicted Flow Dynamics in Anatomically Realistic Cerebral Aneurysm Models

2008· article· en· W2081541542 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityRobarts Clinical TrialsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
FundersSaint Francis UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSt. Francis Xavier University
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsParticle image velocimetryVortexMechanicsFlow (mathematics)AneurysmCardiac cyclePhysicsTurbulenceMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling of nominally patient-specific cerebral aneurysms is increasingly being used as a research tool to further understand the development, prognosis, and treatment of brain aneurysms. We have previously developed virtual angiography to indirectly validate CFD-predicted gross flow dynamics against the routinely acquired digital subtraction angiograms. Toward a more direct validation, here we compare detailed, CFD-predicted velocity fields against those measured using particle imaging velocimetry (PIV). Two anatomically realistic flow-through phantoms, one a giant internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysm and the other a basilar artery (BA) tip aneurysm, were constructed of a clear silicone elastomer. The phantoms were placed within a computer-controlled flow loop, programed with representative flow rate waveforms. PIV images were collected on several anterior-posterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) planes. CFD simulations were then carried out using a well-validated, in-house solver, based on micro-CT reconstructions of the geometries of the flow-through phantoms and inlet/outlet boundary conditions derived from flow rates measured during the PIV experiments. PIV and CFD results from the central AP plane of the ICA aneurysm showed a large stable vortex throughout the cardiac cycle. Complex vortex dynamics, captured by PIV and CFD, persisted throughout the cardiac cycle on the central LAT plane. Velocity vector fields showed good overall agreement. For the BA, aneurysm agreement was more compelling, with both PIV and CFD similarly resolving the dynamics of counter-rotating vortices on both AP and LAT planes. Despite the imposition of periodic flow boundary conditions for the CFD simulations, cycle-to-cycle fluctuations were evident in the BA aneurysm simulations, which agreed well, in terms of both amplitudes and spatial distributions, with cycle-to-cycle fluctuations measured by PIV in the same geometry. The overall good agreement between PIV and CFD suggests that CFD can reliably predict the details of the intra-aneurysmal flow dynamics observed in anatomically realistic in vitro models. Nevertheless, given the various modeling assumptions, this does not prove that they are mimicking the actual in vivo hemodynamics, and so validations against in vivo data are encouraged whenever possible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.213 · 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