MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397059713 · doi:10.5555/2685617.2685663

Simulation of brain-skull development utilizing a hybrid model

2014· article· en· W2397059713 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Jin, Roy Eagleson, Sandrine de Ribaupierre, Sidney Fels

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkullCraniosynostosisFibrous jointCraniosynostosesSagittal sutureCranioplastyProcess (computing)Computer scienceAnatomyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a hybrid model which includes both standard finite element and rigid bodies for a clinical application involving skull-brain co-development in infants, with particular application for craniosynostosis modeling. To accommodate the rapid expanding brain during the first few months after birth, the skull needs to extend fast enough to increase its inner volume. Sutures that are fibrous tissues uniting the skull plates together are the major sites for skull growth during this period. At the sutures, the skull develops along these fronts in order to try to maintain the unossfied state itself. Craniosynostosis, which is a developmental abnormality, occurs when one or more sutures are fused early in life (even in utero) while the skull is growing, resulting in an abnormal skull shape. Surgery is required to reopen the suture and reduce the excessive intracranial pressure, but leaving neurosurgeons difficulties without any predicting model to assist surgical plan. Before achieve our final goal (predict patient-specific post-surgical head development), we aim to firstly study normal brain-skull growth by computer simulation, which requires a head model and appropriate mathematical algorithms for brain and skull growth respectively. On the basis of previous model, we further specified suture model into fibrous and cartilaginous sutures and develop mathematical model for skull extension. We were able to produce a series of cranial shape indices along the simulation, part of which discrepancies from reference data due to instability of the model. Some potential future work would be discussed to maintain the stability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207