MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042985803 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/8/020

Measurement of the hyperelastic properties of 44 pathological<i>ex vivo</i>breast tissue samples

2009· article· en· W2042985803 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHyperelastic materialOgdenElasticity (physics)PolynomialElastic modulusElastographyBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceBreast cancerNonlinear systemMaterials scienceMathematicsCancerMedicineRadiologyUltrasoundMathematical analysisPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The elastic and hyperelastic properties of biological soft tissues have been of interest to the medical community. There are several biomedical applications where parameters characterizing such properties are critical for a reliable clinical outcome. These applications include surgery planning, needle biopsy and brachtherapy where tissue biomechanical modeling is involved. Another important application is interpreting nonlinear elastography images. While there has been considerable research on the measurement of the linear elastic modulus of small tissue samples, little research has been conducted for measuring parameters that characterize the nonlinear elasticity of tissues included in tissue slice specimens. This work presents hyperelastic measurement results of 44 pathological ex vivo breast tissue samples. For each sample, five hyperelastic models have been used, including the Yeoh, N = 2 polynomial, N = 1 Ogden, Arruda-Boyce, and Veronda-Westmann models. Results show that the Yeoh, polynomial and Ogden models are the most accurate in terms of fitting experimental data. The results indicate that almost all of the parameters corresponding to the pathological tissues are between two times to over two orders of magnitude larger than those of normal tissues, with C(11) showing the most significant difference. Furthermore, statistical analysis indicates that C(02) of the Yeoh model, and C(11) and C(20) of the polynomial model have very good potential for cancer classification as they show statistically significant differences for various cancer types, especially for invasive lobular carcinoma. In addition to the potential for use in cancer classification, the presented data are very important for applications such as surgery planning and virtual reality based clinician training systems where accurate nonlinear tissue response modeling is required.

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)0.000
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 score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.156 · 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