Three-Phase-Lag Bio-Heat Transfer Model of Cardiac Ablation
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
Significant research efforts have been devoted in the past decades to accurately modelling the complex heat transfer phenomena within biological tissues. These modeling efforts and analysis have assisted in a better understanding of the intricacies of associated biological phenomena and factors that affect the treatment outcomes of hyperthermic therapeutic procedures. In this contribution, we report a three-dimensional non-Fourier bio-heat transfer model of cardiac ablation that accounts for the three-phase-lags (TPL) in the heat propagation, viz., lags due to heat flux, temperature gradient, and thermal displacement gradient. Finite element-based COMSOL Multiphysics software has been utilized to predict the temperature distributions and ablation volumes. A comparative analysis has been conducted to report the variation in the treatment outcomes of cardiac ablation considering different bio-heat transfer models. The effect of variations in the magnitude of different phase lags has been systematically investigated. The fidelity and integrity of the developed model have been evaluated by comparing the results of the developed model with the analytical results of the recent studies available in the literature. This study demonstrates the importance of considering non-Fourier lags within biological tissue for predicting more accurately the characteristics important for the efficient application of thermal therapies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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