A Regulator for Pressure-Controlled Total-Liquid Ventilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Total-liquid ventilation (TLV) is an innovative experimental method of mechanical-assisted ventilation in which lungs are totally filled and then ventilated with a tidal volume of perfluorochemical liquid by using a dedicated liquid ventilator. Such a novel medical device must resemble other conventional ventilators: it must be able to conduct controlled-pressure ventilation. The objective was to design a robust controller to perform pressure-regulated expiratory flow and to implement it on our latest liquid-ventilator prototype (Inolivent-4). Numerical simulations, in vitro experiments, and in vivo experiments in five healthy term newborn lambs have demonstrated that it was efficient to generate expiratory flows while avoiding collapses. Moreover, the in vivo results have demonstrated that our liquid ventilator can maintain adequate gas exchange, normal acid-base equilibrium, and achieve greater minute ventilation, better oxygenation and CO2 extraction, while nearing flow limits. Hence, it is our suggestion to perform pressure-controlled ventilation during expiration with minute ventilation equal or superior to 140 mL x min(-1) x kg(-1) in order to ensure PaCO2 below 55 mmHg. From a clinician's point of view, pressure-controlled ventilation greatly simplifies the use of the liquid ventilator, which will certainly facilitate its introduction in intensive care units for clinical applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".