MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138616889 · doi:10.1109/sbec.1995.514423

Numerical simulations of flow in flared sections of the human infrarenal aorta

2002· article· en· W2138616889 on OpenAlexafffund
N. Mapara, Neil F. MacLean, David A. Steinman, David W. Holdsworth, Margot R. Roach

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsReynolds numberLaminar flowMechanicsNewtonian fluidFlow (mathematics)PhysicsMaterials scienceGeometryTurbulenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The formation of separation zones in arteries may have important implications in the development of atherosclerotic lesions. It is known that arteries flare proximally to bifurcations where atherosclerotic lesions develop. Flow through an axisymmetric flared cylinder, which simulated the human infrarenal aorta, was studied using FIDAP, a finite element analysis program. Blood was assumed to have Newtonian properties while the flow was assumed to be steady and laminar. The wall of the artery was considered to be rigid. For this study, the angle of flare was varied from 1/spl deg/ to 5/spl deg/ with an inlet to outlet diameter ratio of 0.33. Reynolds numbers for the simulation ranged from 100 to 1000. A critical Reynolds number existed below which no separation zone was formed. At Reynolds numbers greater than this critical value, recirculation zones formed downstream of the flare. A linear relationship was observed between the length of the recirculation zone and the Reynolds number. There was an inverse, non-linear relationship between the critical Reynolds number and the flaring angle. The length of the recirculation zone was more sensitive to changes in Reynolds numbers at higher flaring angles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207