Dynamic Adaptation of the Peripheral Circulation to Cold Exposure
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
Humans residing or working in cold environments exhibit a stronger cold-induced vasodilation (CIVD) reaction in the peripheral microvasculature than those living in warm regions of the world, leading to a general assumption that thermal responses to local cold exposure can be systematically improved by natural acclimatization or specific acclimation. However, it remains unclear whether this improved tolerance is actually due to systematic acclimatization, or alternately due to the genetic pre-disposition or self-selection for such occupations. Longitudinal studies of repeated extremity exposure to cold demonstrate only ambiguous adaptive responses. In field studies, general cold acclimation may lead to increased sympathetic activity that results in reduced finger blood flow. Laboratory studies offer more control over confounding parameters, but in most studies, no consistent changes in peripheral blood flow occur even after repeated exposure for several weeks. Most studies are performed on a limited amount of subjects only, and the variability of the CIVD response demands more subjects to obtain significant results. This review systematically surveys the trainability of CIVD, concluding that repeated local cold exposure does not alter circulatory dynamics in the peripheries, and that humans remain at risk of cold injuries even after extended stays in cold environments.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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