Experimental Ivestigation of Acupoint Local Temperature Influence in Hyperlipemia(HLP) Rats Treated by Different Quantities of warming Moxibustion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To observe the quality of temperature changes before and after different quantities of warming moxibustion,and explore the quantity-effect signficance from the aspect of temperature.Methods:Acupoint temperatures of three common different quantities of ginger-separated moxibustion(3min,6min,9min) were measured respectively in HLP rats,and then a comparison of surface temperature changes in two acupoints(Shenque,Zusanli) was made among pre-moxibustion,moxibustion-processing and post-moxibustion.Results:See from the acupoint:temperature foundational walue of Shenque Zusanli,but fluctuate range Shenquezusanli.The maximal surface temperatures of Shenque and Zusanli among three different quantities of warming moxibustion were different.The discrepancy showed statistical significance;When warming moxibustion completed,the discrepancy of temperature of Shenque with different moxibustion quantities showed statistical significance,but Zusanli did not.Conclusion:Stimulation of different quantities of moxibustion is an important factor affecting acupoint local temperature,while the thermal effect of warming moxibustion in different acupionts shows a discrepancy.
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) | 0.001 | 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".