A classification approach to improve out of sample predictability of structure‐based constitutive models for ascending thoracic aortic tissue
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
In this research, a pipeline was developed to assess the out-of-sample predictive capability of structure-based constitutive models of ascending aortic aneurysmal tissue. The hypothesis being tested is that a biomarker can help establish similarities among tissues sharing the same level of a quantifiable property, thus enabling the development of biomarker-specific constitutive models. Biomarker-specific averaged material models were constructed from biaxial mechanical tests of specimens that shared similar biomarker properties such as level of blood-wall shear stress or microfiber (elastin or collagen) degradation in the extracellular matrix. Using a cross-validation strategy commonly used in classification algorithms, biomarker-specific averaged material models were assessed in contrast to individual tissue mechanics of out of sample specimens that fell under the same category but did not contribute to the averaged model's generation. The normalized root means square errors (NRMSE) calculated on out-of-sample data were compared with average models when no categorization was performed versus biomarker-specific models and among different level of a biomarker. Different biomarker levels exhibited statistically different NRMSE when compared among each other, indicating more common features shared by the specimens belonging to the lower error groups. However, no specific biomarkers reached a significant difference when compared to the average model created when No Categorization was performed, possibly on account of unbalanced number of specimens. The method developed could allow for the screening of different biomarkers or combinations/interactions in a systematic manner leading the way to larger datasets and to more individualized constitutive approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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