Losing the dogmatic view of cerebral autoregulation
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
In 1959, Niels Lassen illustrated the cerebral autoregulation curve in the classic review article entitled Cerebral Blood Flow and Oxygen Consumption in Man. This concept suggested a relatively broad mean arterial pressure range (~60-150 mmHg) wherein cerebral blood flow remains constant. However, the assumption that this wide cerebral autoregulation plateau could be applied on a within-individual basis is incorrect and greatly variable between individuals. Indeed, each data point on the autoregulatory curve originated from independent samples of participants and patients and represented interindividual relationships between cerebral blood flow and mean arterial pressure. Nonetheless, this influential concept remains commonly cited and illustrated in various high-impact publications and medical textbooks, and is frequently taught in medical and science education without appropriate nuances and caveats. Herein, we provide the rationale and additional experimental data supporting the notion we need to lose this dogmatic view of cerebral autoregulation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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