MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013860334 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/60/9/3775

The ‘sixth sense’ of ultrasound: probing nonlinear elasticity with acoustic radiation force

2015· article· en· W2013860334 on OpenAlexaff
Bojan B. Guzina, Egor Dontsov, Matthew W. Urban, Mostafa Fatemi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcoustic radiation forceIsotropyElasticity (physics)ViscoelasticityShear modulusCompressibilityAcousticsImaging phantomNonlinear systemShear wavesElastic modulusMaterials scienceBulk modulusStiffnessNonlinear acousticsMechanicsShear (geology)PhysicsOpticsUltrasoundComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prompted by a recent finding that the magnitude of the acoustic radiation force (ARF) in isotropic tissue-like solids depends linearly on a particular third-order modulus of elasticity-hereon denoted by C, this study investigates the possibility of estimating C from the amplitude of the ARF-generated shear waves. The featured coefficient of nonlinear elasticity, which captures the incipient nonlinear interaction between the volumetric and deviatoric modes of deformation, has so far received only a limited attention in the context of soft tissues due to the fact that the latter are often approximated as (i) fluid-like when considering ultrasound waves, and (ii) incompressible under static deformations. On establishing the analytical and computational platform for the proposed sensing methodology, the study proceeds with applying the prototype technique toward estimating via ARF the third-order modulus C in a series of tissue-mimicking phantoms. To help validate the concept and its implementation, the germane third-order modulus is independently estimated in each phantom via an established technique known as acoustoelasticity. The C-estimates obtained respectively via acoustoelasticity and the new theory of ARF show a significant degree of consistency. The key features of the new sensing methodology are that: (a) it requires no external deformation of a material other than that produced by the ARF, and (b) it estimates the nonlinear C-modulus locally, over the focal region of an ultrasound beam-where the shear waves are being generated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207