Cerebrovascular Reactivity: Purpose, Optimizing Methods, and Limitations to Interpretation – A Personal 20-Year Odyssey of (Re)searching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The brain is a neurovascular organ. A stimulus-response approach is effective in interrogating the physiology of its vasculature. Ideally, the stimulus is standardized across patients, and in a single patient over time. We developed a standard stimulus and attempted to measure, classify, and interpret the many forms of responses. Over the past 20 years, our work has delivered nuanced insights into normal cerebral vascular physiology, as well as adaptive physiological responses in the presence of disease. The trajectory of our understanding did not follow a logical linear progression; rather, it emerged as a coalescence of new, old, and previously dismissed, ideas that had accumulated over time. In this essay, we review what we believe were our most valuable - and sometimes controversial insights during our two decades-long journey.
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 | 0.190 | 0.203 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.031 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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".