MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2310462475 · doi:10.11575/prism/28643

Viscoelasticity of Articular Cartilage and Ligament: Constitutive Modeling and Experiments

2013· dissertation· en· W2310462475 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sahand Ahsanizadeh

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsViscoelasticityArticular cartilageLigamentConstitutive equationCartilageOsteoarthritisMaterials scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringMedicineAnatomyComposite materialPathologyFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Articular cartilage and ligament are soft fibrous connective tissues with apparent viscoelastic behavior. An anisotropic visco-hyperelastic constitutive model for these tissues has been proposed in this study based on the short-term and long-term internal variables. The constitutive model was particularized for both tissues, numerically implemented into the finite element software package ABAQUS and the material parameters were identified using the available experimental data. The constitutive model was able to capture both the short-term and long-term time-dependent response of these tissues with less difficulty in material characterization process. Due to the lack of the desired tensile experimental results on articular cartilage, the mechanical behavior of this tissue was also examined experimentally. The tensile stiffness of articular cartilage was found to be rate-dependent. It has been shown by numerical simulations that the strain-rate dependent tensile stiffness of collagen fibers can also contribute to the highly rate-dependent compressive response of articular cartilage, besides the fluid-driven viscoelasticity.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207