Collaborators Meeting

Date: January 6, 2021

Time: 5:00 PM US/Eastern

Means: Skype

Attendees:

  1. Jason Halloran (WSU)
  2. Will Zaylor (CSU)
  3. Carl Imhauser (HSS)
  4. Shady Elmasry (HSS)
  5. Peter Laz (DU)
  6. Donald Hume (DU)
  7. Nynke Rooks (ABI)
  8. Marco Schneider (ABI)
  9. Ahmet Erdemir (CC)
  10. Neda Abdollahi (CC)

Agenda:

  1. Model Calibration outcomes.
  2. Model Benchmarking phase plan.
  3. Manuscripts.
  4. Grant renewal.
  5. Other.

Immediate Action Items:

Notes:

  1. Ahmet summarized the progress on Model Calibration phase outcomes. DU submitted; the package was downloaded. CSU/WSU submitted; the materials were downloaded. ABI submitted; the materials were downloaded. CC submitted; the materials need to be downloaded. HSS will submit by the end of the week. Ahmet will upload all the packages to SimTK.
  2. Ahmet summarized his intentions for the Model Benchmarking phase. DU and CC teams met and finalized new, explicit descriptions of calibration data to remove any ambiguity in data descriptions used in the Model Calibration phase. They also prepared both calibration data and data for Model Benchmarking phase leveraging the same explicit descriptions. Ahmet proposed that the groups run their calibration workflows with the updated calibration data and their descriptions as part of the Model Benchmarking phase. This will ensure that any discrepancies in calibration do not originate from misinterpretation of calibration data. He reminded that this step should not include the teams to change their calibration workflow, rather rerun it with the updated data. All loading cases for the updated calibration data set should be simulated. In following, loading cases for the benchmarking should be simulated. Benchmarking loading case include (i) combined loading through flexion (for oks003) and (ii) laxity loading of the ACL deficient knee at different flexion angles (for DU02). Ahmet will prepare the Model Benchmarking phase wiki page accordingly, for others to review. In response to questions from Will, Shady, and Carl, Ahmet noted that we may not necessarily establish unit testing for the updated data sets. Nonetheless, the descriptions are explicit therefor not leaving much room for subjective interpretation. The updated data sets and their descriptions will be reviewed as part of the next meeting to finalize Model Benchmarking phase planning.
  3. Recalibration of models will increase the burden of the benchmarking phase. Nonetheless, the process should be fairly straightforward, i.e. simulating a bunch of experimental loading cases sometimes iteratively. Ahmet asked about a reasonable timeline for the delivery of Model Benchmarking outcomes while also paying attention to the project timeline. He anticipates that once the wiki page is up and reviewed by the teams the timeline can be: end of February for specifications, end of May for recalibration, end of June for load cases earmarked for benchmarking (including documentation of all protocol deviations). Per Carl's question and a follow up discussion Ahmet noted that all the outcomes (recalibration and benchmark simulations) can be compiled in one package and delivered by the end of June. Or, recalibration package can be delivered early, if the teams feel like they need to set internal deadlines to ensure timely response. The teams seem to be in agreement with this timeline.
  4. Status on manuscripts were reported. Jason will submit the article on reproducibility potentialof knee models soon. Nynke confirmed that we are waiting for editor's decision for the resubmitted manuscript on Model Development phase. She is also finalizing changes to the mesh comparison paper. Ahmet asked Carl if he has the intention to submit the manuscript on ORS workshop. Carl still has an interest. Ahmet noted that it is not Carl's decision to pursue this. A few potential publications are in the pipeline, i.e. related to data interpration and model calibration. DU team will be leading these.
  5. In terms of grant renewal, Ahmet had one-to-one discussions with some team leads and some ideas have been circulated. Carl asked if we should prepare a dummy aims page as a placeholder and a target to support preliminary analysis. This may be a good idea to at least curate some of the directions that we may take. Ahmet also noted that this is a good time for the teams to consider if they would like to be involved with a renewal submission. Possible submission schedule includes July or October deadlines. July may be too early (as discussed) given that we need to wrap up Model Benchmarking and work on scholarly publications. October can be aimed as a reasonable yet still timely renewal submission. Ahmet emphasized that for a strong submission, we need to have the Model Benchmarking phase finalized (at least by a few teams) and some manuscripts published. He also noted that we should have the specific aims finalized at least a couple months ahead of the submission deadline.

2021-01-06 (last edited 2021-01-07 13:40:14 by aerdemir)