MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170671741

Computational replicas: anatomic reconstructions of cerebral vessels as volume numerical grids at three-dimensional angiography.

2004· article· en· W2170671741 on OpenAlexaff
Tamer Hassan, E. Timofeev, Tsutomu Saito, Hiroaki Shimizu, Masayuki Ezura, Teiji Tominaga, Akira Takahashi, Kazuyoshi Takayama

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDigital subtraction angiographyRotational angiographyDICOMAngiographySubtractionGridVisualizationRadiologyComputed tomography angiographyBlood flowComputer visionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We present a relatively simple approach that physicians can use to reconstruct cerebral vessels as 3D numerical grids or computational replicas. The method accurately duplicates their geometry to provide computer simulations of their blood flow. METHODS: Initial images were obtained by using any medical imaging technique, such as MR angiography, CT angiography, or 3D digital subtraction angiography. The data were collected in DICOM format and converted by a DICOM reader into a 3D gray-scale raster image. The image was then processed by using commercial visualization and mesh generation software, which allowed extraction of the luminal surface of the blood vessel (by using the isosurfacing technique). The subsequent final output was an unstructured tetrahedral grid that can be directly used for detailed analysis of cerebral vascular geometry for patient-specific simulations of blood flow. RESULTS: Four examples of grid reconstruction and blood flow simulation for patients with ruptured aneurysms were validated with angiographic and operative findings. The ruptured areas were correlated with areas of high fluid-induced wall-shear stress. CONCLUSION: This approach promises to be a practical tool for planning treatment and follow-up of patients after neurosurgical or endovascular interventions with 3D angiography. The proposed commercial packages or conceptually similar ones seem to be relatively simple and suitable for direct use by neurosurgeons or neuroradiologists.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations82
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207