ArticleAIP conference proceedings2024
Fluid Focusing Contributes to the BM Vibration Amplification by Boosting the Pressure.
Article in AIP conference proceedings, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Two hydrodynamic effects are introduced in the standard transmission-line formalism, the focusing of the pressure and fluid velocity fields near the basilar membrane and the viscous damping at the fluid-basilar membrane interface, which significantly affect the cochlear response in the short-wave region. In this region, in which the wavelength is shorter than the cochlear duct height, only a layer of fluid of order of the wavelength is effectively involved in the traveling wave. This has been interpreted [8] as a reduced fluid contribution to the system inertia in the peak region, which is a viewpoint common to the 3-D FEM solutions. In this paper we propose an alternative approach, from a slightly different physical viewpoint. Invoking the fluid flux conservation along the traveling wave propagation direction, we can derive a rigorous propagation equation for the pressure integrated along the vertical axis. Consequently, the relation between the average pressure and the local pressure [4] at the fluid-BM interface can be written. The local pressure is amplified by a factor dependent on the local wavenumber with respect to the average pressure, a phenomenon we refer to as "fluid focusing", which plays a relevant role in the BM total amplification gain. This interpretation of the hydrodynamic boost to the pressure provides a physical justification to the strategy [10] of fitting the BM admittance with a polynomial containing both a conjugated pole and a zero. In the short-wave region, the sharp gradients of the velocity field yield a second important effect, a damping force on the BM motion, proportional to the local wavenumber, which stabilizes active models and shifts the peak of the response towards the base, with respect to the resonant place. This way, the peaked BM response is not that of a proper resonance, corresponding to a sharp maximum of the admittance, but rather a focusing-driven growth toward the resonant place, which is "aborted" before reaching it by the sharply increasing viscous losses. The large values of the wavenumber that ensure strong focusing are ultimately fueled, against viscosity, by the nonlinear OHC mechanism, hence the otherwise puzzling observation of a wide nonlinear gain dynamics with almost level-independent admittance.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.