A Prototype of Volume-Controlled Tidal Liquid Ventilator Using Independent Piston Pumps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liquid ventilation using perfluorochemicals (PFC) offers clear theoretical advantages over gas ventilation, such as decreased lung damage, recruitment of collapsed lung regions, and lavage of inflammatory debris. We present a total liquid ventilator designed to ventilate patients with completely filled lungs with a tidal volume of PFC liquid. The two independent piston pumps are volume controlled and pressure limited. Measurable pumping errors are corrected by a programmed supervisor module, which modifies the inserted or withdrawn volume. Pump independence also allows easy functional residual capacity modifications during ventilation. The bubble gas exchanger is divided into two sections such that the PFC exiting the lungs is not in contact with the PFC entering the lungs. The heating system is incorporated into the metallic base of the gas exchanger, and a heat-sink-type condenser is placed on top of the exchanger to retrieve PFC vapors. The prototype was tested on 5 healthy term newborn lambs (<5 days old). The results demonstrate the efficiency and safety of the prototype in maintaining adequate gas exchange, normal acido-basis equilibrium, and cardiovascular stability during a short, 2-hour total liquid ventilator. Airway pressure, lung volume, and ventilation scheme were maintained in the targeted range.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".