MO‐F‐CAMPUS‐I‐01: EIT Imaging to Monitor Human Salivary Gland Functionality: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Clinically, there exists a need to develop a non‐invasive technique for monitoring salivary activity. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of a using the electrical conductivity information from Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) to monitor salivary flow activity. Methods: To acquire EIT data, eight Ag/AgCl ECG electrodes were placed around the mandible of the subject. An EIT scan was obtained by injecting current at 50 KHz, 0.4 mA through each pair of electrodes and recording voltage across other electrode pairs. The functional conductivity image was obtained through reconstruction of the voltage data, using Electrical Impedance Tomography and Diffuse Optical Tomography Reconstruction Software (EIDORS) in Matlab. In using EIDORS, forward solution was obtained using a user‐defined finite element model shape and inverse solution was obtained using one‐step Gaussian solver. EIT scans of volunteer research team members were acquired for three different physiological states: pre‐stimulation, stimulation and post‐stimulation. For pre‐stimulation phase, data were collected in intervals of 5 minutes for 15 minutes. The salivary glands were then stimulated in the subject using lemon and the data were collected immediately. Post‐stimulation data were collected at 4 different timings after stimulation. Results: Variations were observed in the electrical conductivity patterns near parotid regions between the pre‐ and post‐stimulation stages. The three images acquired during the 15 minute pre‐stimulation phase showed no major changes in the conductivity. Immediately after stimulation, electrical conductivity increased near parotid regions and 15 minutes later slowly returned to pre‐stimulation level. Conclusion: In the present study involving human subjects, the change in electrical conductivity pattern shown in the EIT images, acquired at different times with and without stimulation of salivary glands, appeared to be consistent with the change in salivary gland activity. The conductivity changes imaged through EIT are potentially useful for the purpose of salivary monitoring.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".