MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883257454 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00940

Cerebrovascular Compliance Within the Rigid Confines of the Skull

2018· article· en· W2883257454 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Zamir, M. Erin Moir, Stephen A. Klassen, Christopher S. Balestrini, J. Kevin Shoemaker

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSkullCompliance (psychology)MedicineAnatomyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulsatile blood flow is generally mediated by the compliance of blood vessels whereby they distend locally and momentarily to accommodate the passage of the pressure wave. This freedom of the blood vessels to exercise their compliance may be suppressed within the confines of the rigid skull. The effect of this on the mechanics of pulsatile blood flow within the cerebral circulation is not known, and the situation is compounded by experimental access difficulties. We present an approach which we have developed to overcome these difficulties in a study of the mechanics of pulsatile cerebral blood flow. The main finding is that while the innate compliance of cerebral vessels is indeed suppressed within the confines of the skull, this is compensated somewhat by compliance provided by other "extravascular" elements within the skull. The net result is what we have termed "intracranial compliance," which we argue is more pertinent to the mechanics of pulsatile cerebral blood flow than is intracranial pressure.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207