MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480589279 · doi:10.1080/10255842.2016.1214270

A novel micro-to-macro approach for cardiac tissue mechanics

2016· article· en· W2480589279 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMacroComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMechanicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For studying cardiac mechanics, hyperelastic anisotropic computational models have been developed which require the tissue anisotropic and hyperelastic parameters. These parameters are obtained by tissue samples mechanically testing. The validity of such parameters are limited to the specific tissue sample only. They are not adaptable for pathological tissues commonly associated with tissue microstructure alterations. To investigate cardiac tissue mechanics, a novel approach is proposed to model hyperelasticity and anisotropy. This approach is adaptable to various tissue microstructural constituent's distributions in normal and pathological tissues. In this approach, the tissue is idealized as composite material consisting of cardiomyocytes distributed in extracellular matrix (ECM). The major myocardial tissue constituents are mitochondria and myofibrils while the main ECM's constituents are collagen fibers and fibroblasts. Accordingly, finite element simulations of uniaxial and equibiaxial tests of normal and infarcted tissue samples with known amounts of these constituents were conducted, leading to corresponding tissue stress-strain data that were fitted to anisotropic/hyperelastic models. The models were validated where they showed good agreement characterized by maximum average stress-strain errors of 16.17 and 10.01% for normal and infarcted cardiac tissue, respectively. This demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed models in accurate characterization of healthy and pathological cardiac tissues.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.267 · 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