Simulation of atrial fibrillation in a non-ohmic propagation model with dynamic gap junctions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gap junctions exhibit nonlinear electrical properties that have been hypothesized to be relevant to arrhythmogenicity in a structurally remodeled tissue. Large-scale implementation of gap junction dynamics in 3D propagation models remains challenging. We aim to quantify the impact of nonlinear diffusion during episodes of arrhythmias simulated in a left atrial model. Homogenization of conduction properties in the presence of nonlinear gap junctions was performed by generalizing a previously developed mathematical framework. A monodomain model was solved in which conductivities were time-varying and depended on transjunctional potentials. Gap junction conductances were derived from a simplified Vogel-Weingart model with first-order gating and adjustable time constant. A bilayer interconnected cable model of the left atrium with 100 μm resolution was used. The diffusion matrix was recomputed at each time step according to the state of the gap junctions. Sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation episodes were simulated in remodeled tissue substrates. Slow conduction was induced by reduced coupling and by diffuse or stringy fibrosis. Simulations starting from the same initial conditions were repeated with linear and nonlinear gap junctions. The discrepancy in activation times between the linear and nonlinear diffusion models was quantified. The results largely validated the linear approximation for conduction velocities >20 cm/s. In very slow conduction substrates, the discrepancy accumulated over time during atrial fibrillation, eventually leading to qualitative differences in propagation patterns, while keeping the descriptive statistics, such as cycle lengths, unchanged. The discrepancy growth rate was increased by impaired conduction, fibrosis, conduction heterogeneity, lateral uncoupling, fast gap junction time constant, and steeper action potential duration restitution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".