MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285803274 · doi:10.1101/2022.07.15.500238

Interpreting Inverse Correlation Time: from Blood flow to Vascular Network

2022· preprint· en· W4285803274 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qingwei Fang, Chakameh Z. Jafari, Shaun A. Engelmann, Alankrit Tomar, Andrew K. Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - QuébecUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsBlood flowInformation and Communications TechnologyFlow (mathematics)Metric (unit)Speckle patternComputer scienceMedicineCardiologyMathematicsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceOperations managementGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The inverse correlation time (ICT) is a key quantity in laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) measurements. Traditionally, ICT is regarded as a metric of blood flow, such as speed or perfusion. However, we highlight that ICT not only contains important information about blood flow, but also reflects the underlying structure of the vascular network. In the past, ICT has been found to be correlated with vessel diameter. Here, we further report that ICT exhibits a different sensitivity to blood flow depending on vessel orientation. Specifically, ICT is more sensitive to blood flow speed changes in vessels descending from or arising to the tissue surface, compared with those laying parallel to the surface. Those findings shift our understanding of ICT from purely blood flow to a combination of blood flow and vascular network structure. We also develop theories to facilitate the study of vascular network’s impact on ICT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207