MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226401694 · doi:10.1177/10812865221088520

Prediction of bone microstructures degradation during osteoporosis with fuzzy cellular automata algorithm

2022· article· en· W4226401694 on OpenAlexaff
Armin Shahmohammadi, Seyedfarzad Famouri, Seyedmohammadreza Hosseini, Maryam Mazraehei Farahani, Mostafa Baghani, Daniel George, Majid Baniassadi

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics and Mechanics of Solids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersCampus France
KeywordsCellular automatonAlgorithmFuzzy logicMicrostructureComputer scienceBiological systemMathematicsMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel fuzzy cellular automata is proposed to simulate bone degradation during osteoporosis. The initial three-dimensional (3D) bone microstructure is obtained from computed tomography (CT) images. Cellular automata algorithm is implemented to the 3D lattice and a Sugeno Fuzzy inference system is designed with nine sets of fuzzy rules to simulate the degradation process. A distance vector parameter is defined to describe the number of neighborhood cells that each cell can have a connection with. It is shown that by increasing the value of this distance vector, the results converge toward a quasi-constant degraded microstructure. The obtained microstructure is considered to be the final result and compared to prediction of bone degradation of the literature based on phase exchange calculated from mechanical strain energy. It is shown that the fuzzy cellular automata model predicts a more realistic bone degradation and microstructure distribution than the phase exchange method while having a model significantly simpler.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics and Mechanics of SolidsSame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207