Analytic Solution of the Anisotropic Bidomain Equations for Myocardial Tissue: The Effect of Adjoining Conductive Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anisotropic bidomain model for the propagation of electrical activation in the human myocardium H consists of coupled elliptic-parabolic partial differential equations for the transmembrane potential Vm, intracellular potential phi(i), and extracellular potential phi(e) in H, together with quasi-static equations for the potential distribution phiB in the surrounding (passive) isotropic extracardiac regions B. Four local parameters sigma((i,e) (l,t)) specify the conductivities in the longitudinal (l) and transverse (t) directions with respect to cardiac muscle fibers. Continuous current flow is required at the interface S(H) between H and B. We derive analytic formulas for Vm, phi(e), phi(i), and phiB for plane wave propagation in a uniformly anisotropic slab surmounted by a homogeneous region of conductivity sigmaB. No assumptions are required regarding the anisotropy ratios of the conductivity coefficients. The properties of these solutions are examined with a view to providing insight into the effect of the passive region B on the propagation of Vm and phi(e) in H. We show that for a suitably chosen boundary condition, the problem can be reduced to solving the bidomain equations in H alone.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".