Comparative cardiovascular physiology: future trends, opportunities and challenges
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inaugural Kjell Johansen Lecture in the Zoophysiology Department of Aarhus University (Aarhus, Denmark) afforded the opportunity for a focused workshop comprising comparative cardiovascular physiologists to ponder some of the key unanswered questions in the field. Discussions were centred around three themes. The first considered function of the vertebrate heart in its various forms in extant vertebrates, with particular focus on the role of intracardiac shunts, the trabecular ('spongy') nature of the ventricle in many vertebrates, coronary blood supply and the building plan of the heart as revealed by molecular approaches. The second theme involved the key unanswered questions in the control of the cardiovascular system, emphasizing autonomic control, hypoxic vasoconstriction and developmental plasticity in cardiovascular control. The final theme involved poorly understood aspects of the interaction of the cardiovascular system with the lymphatic, renal and digestive systems. Having posed key questions around these three themes, it is increasingly clear that an abundance of new analytical tools and approaches will allow us to learn much about vertebrate cardiovascular systems in the coming years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it