MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162003502 · doi:10.82308/5414

Evaluation of the nonlinear dynamics of human aortas for material characterization

2020· dissertation· en· W7162003502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Isabella Bozzo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscoelasticityHyperelastic materialPulsatile flowAortaCardiac cycleStiffnessCirculatory systemThoracic aortaWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular disease is the second leading cause of death in Canada, resulting in $20.9 billion annual healthcare expenditures. Understanding the mechanics of the human aorta is fundamental for studying pathology progression and improving surgical grafts. This work is an experimental evaluation of the dynamic response of the human descending thoracic aorta to pulsatile flow, for hyperelastic and viscoelastic material characterizations. A mock circulatory loop was built to reproduce physiological cardiac pulsatile conditions for the aorta ex-vivo, and obtain the viscoelastic parameters with fluid-structure interactions. Then, specimens were dissected into the three constituent layers: intima, media and adventitia, for layer-specific material characterization. The hyperelastic response was described according to the Gasser-Ogden-Holzapfel model, and a three-spring generalized Maxwell model captured the viscoelastic behavior. The results showed a positive correlation between age and stiffness for all layers, both axially and circumferentially. Similar loss tangent values were found for the three layers independently, but, were larger for the complete aorta in the circulatory loop due to the fluid-structure interaction and grew with pulse frequency. An increase in the storage modulus by 150% from static to dynamic experiments further confirmed the importance of developing a viscoelastic model of the aorta, rather than a solely hyperelastic one. The mock circulatory loop was also effective in simulating in-vivo conditions to obtain viscoelastic parameters at high pulse rates. These are otherwise impossible to determine by MRI or CT scans, without invasive tests. This work is the precursor for designing medical devices and developing innovative biomaterials that better replicate aortic behaviour

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207