Acousto-electrical speckle pattern in Lorentz force electrical impedance tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasound speckle is a granular texture pattern appearing in ultrasound imaging. It can be used to distinguish tissues and identify pathologies. Lorentz force electrical impedance tomography is an ultrasound-based medical imaging technique of the tissue electrical conductivity. It is based on the application of an ultrasound wave in a medium placed in a magnetic field and on the measurement of the induced electric current due to Lorentz force. Similarly to ultrasound imaging, we hypothesized that a speckle could be observed with Lorentz force electrical impedance tomography imaging. In this study, we first assessed the theoretical similarity between the measured signals in Lorentz force electrical impedance tomography and in ultrasound imaging modalities. We then compared experimentally the signal measured in both methods using an acoustic and electrical impedance interface. Finally, a bovine muscle sample was imaged using the two methods. Similar speckle patterns were observed. This indicates the existence of an 'acousto-electrical speckle' in the Lorentz force electrical impedance tomography with spatial characteristics driven by the acoustic parameters but due to electrical impedance inhomogeneities instead of acoustic ones as is the case of ultrasound imaging.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".