Data-Driven Lossy Tube-Load Modeling of Arterial Tree: In-Human Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present and validate a data-driven method to lossy tube-load modeling of arterial tree in humans. In the proposed method, the lossy tube-load model is fitted to central aortic and peripheral blood pressure (BP) waves in the time domain. For this purpose, we employ a time-domain lossy tube-load model in which the wave propagation constant is formulated to two terms: one responsible for the alteration of wave amplitude and the other for the transport delay. Using the experimental BP data collected from 17 cardiac surgery patients, we showed that the time-domain lossy tube-load model is able to accurately represent the relation between central aortic versus upper-limb and lower-limb BP waves. In addition, the comparison of lossy versus lossless tube-load models revealed that (1) the former outperformed the latter in general with the root-mean-squared errors (RMSE) of 3.1 mm Hg versus 3.5 mm Hg, respectively (p-value < 0.05), and (2) the efficacy of the former over the latter was more clearly observed in case the normalized difference in the mean central aortic versus peripheral BP was large; when the difference was >5% of the underlying mean BP, lossy and lossless models showed the RMSE of 2.7 mm Hg and 3.7 mm Hg, respectively (p-value < 0.05).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".