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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper provides a deepened insight into the role of anisotropy in the analysis of residual stresses in arteries. Residual deformations are modelled following Holzapfel and Ogden (Holzapfel and Ogden 2010, J. R. Soc. Interface 7, 787-799. ( doi:10.1098/rsif.2009.0357 )), which is based on extensive experimental data on human abdominal aortas (Holzapfel et al. 2007, Ann. Biomed. Eng. 35, 530-545. ( doi:10.1007/s10439-006-9252-z )) and accounts for both circumferential and axial residual deformations of the individual layers of arteries-intima, media and adventitia. Each layer exhibits distinctive nonlinear and anisotropic mechanical behaviour originating from its unique microstructure; therefore, we use the most general form of strain-energy function (Holzapfel et al. 2015, J. R. Soc. Interface 12, 20150188. ( doi:10.1098/rsif.2015.0188 )) to derive residual stresses for each layer individually. Finally, the systematic experimental data (Niestrawska et al. 2016, J. R. Soc. Interface 13, 20160620. ( doi:10.1098/rsif.2016.0620 )) on both mechanical and structural properties of the different layers of the human abdominal aorta facilitate our discussion on (i) the importance of anisotropy in modelling residual stresses; (ii) the variability of residual stresses within the same class of tissue, the abdominal aorta; (iii) the limitations of conventional opening angle method to account for complex residual deformations; and (iv) the effect of residual stresses on the loaded configuration of the aorta mimicking in vivo conditions.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 it