MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235300147 · doi:10.1504/ijbet.2021.115972

Experimental design for testing and analysis of z-type self-expanding endovascular stents

2021· article· en· W4235300147 on OpenAlexaff
Joel C. R. Scott, Darrel A. Doman, Clifton R. Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStentRadial Force VariationReduction (mathematics)Materials scienceComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMechanical engineeringSurgeryMedicineGeometryEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stent migration and endoleak are common failure mechanisms for endovascular repair. Both can be partially attributed to a lack in understanding of the mechanical properties of endovascular stents. An alternative radial extensometer and machine vision system have been developed to both raise the quality of published radial force data, as well as to create and present an option for economical stent testing. The apparatus has shown promise as an accurate, repeatable, and reliable system for stent evaluation. Previous results by Johnston et al. examining z-type endovascular stents have been verified. Results showed that smaller stent diameters exhibit higher radial force than larger diameter stents, contrary to the expected outcomes due to increasing drag on increasing diameter stents. Stent orientation has been shown to contribute up to 8.8% error in radial force introduced by non-symmetrical brazed joints. The presence of a stent cover is shown to have negligible impact on stent radial force data above 10% reduction in area.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Biomedical Engineering and TechnologySame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207