MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616837968 · doi:10.14740/jnr.v7i3.435

An Enhanced Patient-Specific Computer Model Using an Iterative Multi-Staged Algorithm

2017· article· en· W2616837968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meide Zhao, Robert Kufahl, M. E. Clark, Sepideh Amin‐Hanjani, Victor Aletich, Ali Alaraj, Xinjian Du, Fady T. Charbel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmMedicineStiffnessComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A previously introduced patient-specific computer model was applied to predict outcomes of the balloon occlusion test (BOT). The goal of this work was to propose an enhanced patient-specific computer model using a new iterative multi-staged algorithm. Method: This work presents an enhanced patient-specific computer model which converts several more terminals from generic, to patient-specific, resistances and also makes the aortic pressure and the stiffness coefficient patient-specific. A new iterative multi-staged algorithm is proposed to determine the terminal resistances, the aortic pressure, and the stiffness coefficient using vessel sizes and vessel flows measured by quantitative magnetic resonance angiography (qMRA) and cuff pressure. The predictions of the BOT were also evaluated for the validation of the proposed model. Results: The predictions from the proposed model were accurate in comparison with the clinical outcomes of the two BOTs. The computed stiffness coefficients were consistent with the ages of the two patients. The correlation coefficients between the flow measurements and the computed flows using the proposed computer model at baseline for the two patients were 0.9861 and 0.9995, respectively. The computed aortic pressures were also comparable in waveform shape with the actual aortic pressure measurements obtained during the BOT using a catheter-transducer. Conclusion: The present study makes the computer model more patient-specific with a new algorithm using non-invasive data from qMRA and cuff pressure. The six more sectors have made the terminal resistances more patient-specific. The patient-specific aortic pressure has made the forcing function patient-specific. And the stiffness coefficient has made the compliance patient-specific. J Neurol Res. 2017;7(3):25-38 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr435w

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology ResearchSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207