Difference frequency magneto-acousto-electrical tomography (DF-MAET): application of ultrasound-induced radiation force to imaging electrical current density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magneto-acousto-electrical tomography (MAET) is a potential imaging modality which can provide high-spatial-resolution images of the impedance of conductive media. In MAET, the impedance is reconstructed from the mapped current density distribution J(ab)(r) that would exist in a sample if a current/voltage source were to be applied through measurement electrodes a and b. To map J(ab)(r) without applying a current/voltage source, the sample is placed in a static magnetic field and a focused ultrasonic pulse is directed to a point r to generate a point-like dipole source via the Lorentz force mechanism. The MAET voltage U(ab), which is directly proportional to J(ab)(r), is measured through electrodes a and b for each scanning point. To reconstruct the electrical impedance, we need to map the current density distribution at every point inside the sample. However, with the MAET experimental setup reported in our previous paper on MAET, the MAET signal from a homogenous interior of the sample is undetectable because of the spatially-oscillating nature of the ultrasound field inside the sample. In this paper, we propose to use dual-frequency ultrasound to generate the MAET signal at the difference frequency through the ultrasound radiation force mechanism. The dynamic radiation force causes vibrations inside the sample (and consequently, generates the electric field) with a wavelength much larger than the dimension of the sample along the transducer's axis. Therefore, the MAET signal caused by the radiation force will not be canceled out. We create a dynamic radiation force by applying an amplitude-modulated signal with a modulation frequency fm of several kilohertz and a carrier frequency f(0) of 2.25 MHz to drive the transducer. The dependence of the DF-MAET signal in experiments on the modulation frequency and on the density of the sample agrees with the prediction based on the radiation force mechanism. The spatial resolution of DF-MAET is also studied to verify the radiation force mechanism. Finally, we will prove that the parametric effect in the coupling oil is not a significant source of the DF-MAET signal by imaging a sample at different distances from the transducer. Potential improvements to the present DF-MAET experimental configuration are also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".