MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Open‐loop Analysis of Transfer Characteristics from Blood Pressure to Heart Rate Using an Effectively Total Artificial Heart

2004· article· en· W2140552704 on OpenAlexaff
Akira Tanaka, Makoto Yoshizawa, Kenichi Abe, Hiroshi Takeda, Tomoyuki Yambe, Shin‐ichi Nitta, Yusuke Abe, Tsuneo Chinzei, Kou Imachi

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Organs · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsArtificial heartController (irrigation)Heart rateComputer scienceAortic pressureBiomedical engineeringOpen-loop controllerBlood pressureControl theory (sociology)SimulationArtificial intelligenceClosed loopCardiologyInternal medicineEngineeringMedicineControl engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is desirable for the dynamic behavior of the drive rate of the artificial heart to be as similar as possible to that of the recipient's heart rate (HR) before implantation. This requires a model which can simulate the behavior of HR on the basis of only the information measured with the limited number of approvable implanted sensors. This article provides a linear time series model for explaining the behavior of HR only with aortic pressure and right atrial pressure. This could be obtained from open-loop analysis using a total artificial heart, which was introduced for measuring HR in vivo and for eliminating its effect on blood pressure. The model was identified in a goat equipped with a special biventricular assist device called the effectively total artificial heart (ETAH). The ETAH was introduced to make an open loop and awake situation in the animal with almost intact autonomic nerves, which could enhance the accuracy and reliability of the identification of the model. The adequacy of the proposed model was ascertained in several data sets measured in two goats, which were different from the data set used for identification. Most of the mean estimation errors were less than 3 beats/min and auto-correlation analysis showed approvable statistical appropriateness. However, it was clarified through comparison with the 1/R control method that the proposed model has a few problems still to be solved before its future implementation as an automatic controller of the TAH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial OrgansSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207