MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200627902 · doi:10.1002/cnm.3559

Automating fractional flow reserve (FFR) calculation from CT scans: A rapid workflow using unsupervised learning and computational fluid dynamics

2021· article· en· W4200627902 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaSwansea UniversityGlobal Challenges Research Fund
KeywordsFractional flow reserveComputational fluid dynamicsComputer scienceWorkflowAtheromaArtificial intelligenceRadiologyMedicineCoronary angiographyCardiologyEngineeringMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) provides the functional relevance of coronary atheroma. The FFR-guided strategy has been shown to reduce unnecessary stenting, improve overall health outcome, and to be cost-saving. The non-invasive, coronary computerised tomography (CT) angiography-derived FFR (cFFR) is an emerging method in reducing invasive catheter based measurements. This computational fluid dynamics-based method is laborious as it requires expertise in multidisciplinary analysis of combining image analysis and computational mechanics. In this work, we present a rapid method, powered by unsupervised learning, to automatically calculate cFFR from CT scans without manual intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it