MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410468087 · doi:10.21276/ierj24520581291741

TREATMENT OF ATHEROSCLEROSIS THROUGH PENETRATION OF PLAQUE BY SOFT ROBOTS

2024· article· en· W4410468087 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education and Research Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenetration (warfare)BusinessRobotComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A substance called plaque accumulates on the inner walls of arteries due to the consumption of foods high in cholesterol, saturated fats, and so on. The accumulation of plaque deposits leads to a condition known as atherosclerosis, which results in the narrowing and hardening of the arteries. This can lead to coronary artery disease, carotid artery disease, peripheral artery disease, chest pain (also referred to as angina pectoris), heart attack, heart failure, and many more medical complications. The current treatments for atherosclerosis include coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), angioplasty, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and a number of health and lifestyle changes that could prevent atherosclerotic plaque buildup. These surgeries either involve opening clogged arteries to prevent constriction or directing the blood away from the blocked artery. In both these cases, risks of bleeding, bruising, and complete recovery are prevalent. Therefore, a procedure in which a robot could remove the plaque from the walls of the arteries would greatly increase the success of the treatment and perhaps reduce the risks. This paper intends to review the newly proposed robots for the treatment of atherosclerosis, some of which are magnetically manipulated to drill the plaque to remove it from the arterial wall, and others that are meant to melt the plaque while still preserving the physical integrity of the arteries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education and Research JournalSame topicPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207