Three-Dimensional Modeling and Measurement of the Human Cochlear Hook Region: Considerations for Tonotopic Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Measuring the length of the basilar membrane (BM) in the cochlear hook region will result in improved accuracy of cochlear duct length (CDL) measurements. BACKGROUND: Cochlear implant pitch mapping is generally performed in a patient independent approach, which has been shown to result in place-pitch mismatches. In order to customize cochlear implant pitch maps, accurate CDL measurements must be obtained. CDL measurements generally begin at the center of the round window (RW) and ignore the basal-most portion of the BM in the hook region. Measuring the size and morphology of the BM in the hook region can improve CDL measurements and our understanding of cochlear tonotopy. METHODS: Ten cadaveric human cochleae underwent synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging. The length of the BM through the hook region and CDL were measured. Two different CDL measurements were obtained for each sample, with starting points at the center of the RW (CDLRW) and the basal-most tip of the BM (CDLHR). Regression analysis was performed to relate CDLRW to CDLHR. A three-dimensional polynomial model was determined to describe the average BM hook region morphology. RESULTS: The mean CDLRW value was 33.03 ± 1.62 mm, and the mean CDLHR value was 34.68 ± 1.72 mm. The following relationship was determined between CDLRW and CDLHR: CDLHR = 1.06(CDLRW)-0.26 (R2 = 0.99). CONCLUSION: The length and morphology of the hook region was determined. Current measurements underestimate CDL in the hook region and can be corrected using the results herein.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".