MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093603109 · doi:10.1051/m2an/2012054

A predictive method allowing the use of a single ionic model in numerical cardiac electrophysiology

2012· article· en· W2093603109 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc Rioux, Yves Bourgault

Bibliographic record

VenueESAIM Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)
KeywordsAction (physics)AnsatzCardiac electrophysiologyBidomain modelMathematicsSet (abstract data type)Current (fluid)Applied mathematicsSpace (punctuation)Statistical physicsMathematical analysisAlgorithmElectrophysiologyComputer sciencePhysicsMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the current debate about simulating the electrical activity in the heart is the following: Using a realistic anatomical setting, i.e. realistic geometries, fibres orientations, etc., is it enough to use a simplified 2-variable phenomenological model to reproduce the main characteristics of the cardiac action potential propagation, and in what sense is it sufficient? Using a combination of dimensional and asymptotic analysis, together with the well-known Mitchell − Schaeffer model, it is shown that it is possible to accurately control (at least locally) the solution while spatial propagation is involved. In particular, we reduce the set of parameters by writing the bidomain model in a new nondimensional form. The parameters of the bidomain model with Mitchell − Schaeffer ion kinetics are then set and shown to be in one-to-one relation with the main characteristics of the four phases of a propagated action potential. Explicit relations are derived using a combination of asymptotic methods and ansatz. These relations are tested against numerical results. We illustrate how these relations can be used to recover the time/space scales and speed of the action potential in various regions of the heart.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESAIM Mathematical Modelling and Numerical AnalysisSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207