Effect of Suspending Viscosity on Red Blood Cell Dynamics and Blood Flows in Microvessels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To obtain a better understanding of the beneficial effect of high plasma viscosity observed in hemodilution and resuscitation experiments, we conducted a computational study to investigate the suspending viscosity effect on red blood cell (RBC) dynamics and blood flow behaviors in microvessels. For single RBCs in simple shear or channel flows, RBCs appear more flexible as indicated by the tank-treading motion in shear flows and the strong transverse migration in channel flows. For the multiple RBC flows in straight channels, our results indicate no significant change with the suspending viscosity in stable flow structure and hemorheologic behaviors, under both constant flow and forcing conditions. However, due to the increase in apparent cell deformability in a more viscous medium, the cell-free layer (CFL) can be established in a shorter distance along the channel. Considering the multilevel bifurcated structure of the microvascular network, this change in CFL development distance may affect the phase skimming and RBC separation processes at the downstream bifurcation, and therefore the microcirculation performance in the tissue. This may suggest a possible mechanism for the high functional capillary density associated with a high suspending viscosity observed in experiments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".