Predicting Bone Adaptation in Astronauts during and after Spaceflight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method was previously developed to identify participant-specific parameters in a model of trabecular bone adaptation from longitudinal computed tomography (CT) imaging. In this study, we use these numerical methods to estimate changes in astronaut bone health during the distinct phases of spaceflight and recovery on Earth. Astronauts (N = 16) received high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT (HR-pQCT) scans of their distal tibia prior to launch (L), upon their return from an approximately six-month stay on the international space station (R+0), and after six (R+6) and 12 (R+12) months of recovery. To model trabecular bone adaptation, we determined participant-specific parameters at each time interval and estimated their bone structure at R+0, R+6, and R+12. To assess the fit of our model to this population, we compared static and dynamic bone morphometry as well as the Dice coefficient and symmetric distance at each measurement. In general, modeled and observed static morphometry were highly correlated (R2> 0.94) and statistically different (p < 0.0001) but with errors close to HR-pQCT precision limits. Dynamic morphometry, which captures rates of bone adaptation, was poorly estimated by our model (p < 0.0001). The Dice coefficient and symmetric distance indicated a reasonable local fit between observed and predicted bone volumes. This work applies a general and versatile computational framework to test bone adaptation models. Future work can explore and test increasingly sophisticated models (e.g., those including load or physiological factors) on a participant-specific basis.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".