MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963942235 · doi:10.1088/0967-3334/32/7/s07

Minimizing EIT image artefacts from mesh variability in finite element models

2011· article· en· W1963942235 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodElectrical impedance tomographyIsotropyPolygon meshInverse problemMathematical analysisAnisotropyNode (physics)InverseIterative reconstructionGeometryProjection (relational algebra)MathematicsAlgorithmComputer sciencePhysicsAcousticsTomographyComputer visionEngineeringStructural engineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) solves an inverse problem to estimate the conductivity distribution within a body from electrical simulation and measurements at the body surface, where the inverse problem is based on a solution of Laplace's equation in the body. Most commonly, a finite element model (FEM) is used, largely because of its ability to describe irregular body shapes. In this paper, we show that simulated variations in the positions of internal nodes within a FEM can result in serious image artefacts in the reconstructed images. Such variations occur when designing FEM meshes to conform to conductivity targets, but the effects may also be seen in other applications of absolute and difference EIT. We explore the hypothesis that these artefacts result from changes in the projection of the anisotropic conductivity tensor onto the FEM system matrix, which introduces anisotropic components into the simulated voltages, which cannot be reconstructed onto an isotropic image, and appear as artefacts. The magnitude of the anisotropic effect is analysed for a small regular FEM, and shown to be proportional to the relative node movement as a fraction of element size. In order to address this problem, we show that it is possible to incorporate a FEM node movement component into the formulation of the inverse problem. These results suggest that it is important to consider artefacts due to FEM mesh geometry in EIT image reconstruction.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.112 · 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