MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2043299926 · doi:10.1115/imece2010-39199

Measurement of Tendon Excursion Using an Audio-Based Fourier Technique With Pulsed-Wave Doppler Ultrasound

2010· article· en· W2043299926 on OpenAlexaff
Kelly J. Stegman, Nikolai Dechev, Edward J. Park, Ronald Podhorodeski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisplacement (psychology)ScannerAcousticsSIGNAL (programming language)Doppler effectUltrasoundComputer scienceSoftwareTendonFourier transformPhysicsArtificial intelligenceMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a feasibility study in estimating the displacement of a moving tendon using Pulsed-Wave Doppler ultrasound. The displacement estimation is accomplished using a tendon mimicking experiment, by performing a Fourier analysis of audio-based output signals from a commercial ultrasound scanner. The feasibility study shows that our proposed technique is better able to measure the actual tendon displacement, in comparison to the scanner’s onboard software, for the purposes of determining near-surface tissue excursion (i.e. displacement). The proposed technique also demonstrates that data acquisition from the audio output signal of a portable ultrasound scanner is possible, and can be processed with custom software to achieve our purpose. The motivation for this work is to noninvasively and dynamically monitor the displacement of the major tendons in the human lower arm. Such tendon displacement monitoring can provide an important diagnostic tool for people with hand injuries.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSports injuries and prevention→French-language works237,207→