Dosimetry evaluation of a cylindrical waveguide chamber for unrestrained small rodents at 1.9 GHz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An exposure system, consisting of four identical cylindrical waveguide chambers, was developed for studying the effects of radiofrequency (RF) energy on laboratory mice at a frequency of 1.9 GHz. The chamber was characterized for RF dose rate as a function of animal body mass and dose rate variations due to animal movement in the cage. Dose rates were quantified in terms of whole-body average (WBA) specific absorption rate (SAR), brain average (BA) SAR and peak spatial-average (PSA) SAR using measurement and computational methods. Measurements were conducted on mouse cadavers in a multitude of possible postures and positions to evaluate the variations of WBA-SAR and its upper and lower bounds, while computations utilizing the finite-difference time-domain method together with a heterogeneous mouse model were performed to determine variations in BA-SAR and the ratio of PSA-SAR to WBA-SAR. Measured WBA-SAR variations were found to be within the ranges of 9-23.5 W/kg and 5.2-13.8 W/kg per 1 W incident power for 20 and 40 g mice, respectively. Computed BA-SAR variations were within the ranges of 3.2-10.1 W/kg and 3.3-9.2 W/kg per 1 W incident power for 25 and 30 g mouse models, respectively. Ratios of PSA-SAR to WBA-SAR, averaged over 0.5 mg and 5 mg tissue volumes, were observed to be within the ranges of 6-15 and 4-10, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".