Effect of Fluid Boundary Conditions on Joint Contact Mechanics and Applications to the Modeling of Osteoarthritic Joints
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
The long-term goal of our research is to understand the mechanism of osteoarthritis (OA) initiation and progress through experimental and theoretical approaches. In previous theoretical models, joint contact mechanics was implemented without consideration of the fluid boundary conditions and with constant permeability. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of fluid boundary conditions at the articular surfaces on the contact mechanics, in terms of load sharing and fluid flow properties using variable permeability. The tested conditions included totally sealed surfaces, open surfaces, and open surfaces with variable permeability. While the sealed surface model failed to predict relaxation times and load sharing properly, the class of open surface models (open surfaces with constant permeability, and surfaces with variable permeability) gave good agreement with experiments, in terms of relaxation time and load sharing between the solid and the fluid phase. In particular, the variable permeability model was judged to be the most realistic of the three models, from a biological and physical point of view. This model was then used to simulate joint contact in the early and late stages of OA. In the early stages of OA, the model predicted a decrease in peak contact pressure and an increase in contact area, while in the late stages of OA, peak pressures were increased and contact areas were decreased compared to normal. These findings agree well with experimental observations.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it