Ex vivo validation of magnetically actuated intravascular untethered robots in a clinical setting
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
Intravascular surgical instruments require precise navigation within narrow vessels, necessitating maximum flexibility, minimal diameter, and high degrees of freedom. Existing tools often lack control during insertion due to undesirable bending, limiting vessel accessibility and risking tissue damage. Next-generation instruments aim to develop hemocompatible untethered devices controlled by external magnetic forces. Achieving this goal remains complex due to testing and implementation challenges in clinical environments. Here we assess the operational effectiveness of hemocompatible untethered magnetic robots using an ex vivo porcine aorta model. The results demonstrate a linear decrease in the swimming speed of untethered magnetic robots as arterial blood flow increases, with the capability to navigate against a maximum arterial flow rate of 67 mL/min. The untethered magnetic robots effectively demonstrate locomotion in a difficult-to-access target site, navigating through the abdominal aorta and reaching the distal end of the renal artery.
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) | 0.000 | 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