Characterization of the human helicotrema: Implications for cochlear duct length and frequency mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Despite significant anatomical variation amongst patients, cochlear implant frequency-mapping has traditionally followed a patient-independent approach. Basilar membrane (BM) length is required for patient-specific frequency-mapping, however cochlear duct length (CDL) measurements generally extend to the apical tip of the entire cochlea or have no clearly defined end-point. By characterizing the length between the end of the BM and the apical tip of the entire cochlea (helicotrema length), current CDL models can be corrected to obtain the appropriate BM length. Synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging has made this analysis possible due to the soft-tissue contrast through the entire cochlear apex. Methods Helicotrema linear length and helicotrema angular length measurements were performed on synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging data of 14 cadaveric human cochleae. On a sub-set of six samples, the CDL to the apical tip of the entire cochlea (CDLTIP) and the BM length (CDLBM) were determined. Regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between CDLTIP and CDLBM. Results The mean helicotrema linear length and helicotrema angular length values were 1.6 ± 0.9 mm and 67.8 ± 37.9 degrees, respectively. Regression analysis revealed the following relationship between CDLTIP and CDLBM: CDLBM = 0.88(CDLTIP) + 3.71 ( R2 = 0.995). Conclusion This is the first known study to characterize the length of the helicotrema in the context of CDL measurements. It was determined that the distance between the end of the BM and the tip of the entire cochlea is clinically consequential. A relationship was determined that can predict the BM length of an individual patient based on their respective CDL measured to the apical tip of the cochlea.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".