Investigation of Standing-Wave Formation in a Human Skull for a Clinical Prototype of a Large-Aperture, Transcranial MR-Guided Focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) Phased Array: An Experimental and Simulation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Standing-wave formation in an ex vivo human skull was investigated using a clinical prototype of a 30-cm diameter with 15-cm radius of curvature, low-frequency (230 kHz), hemispherical transcranial magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound phased array. Experimental and simulation studies were conducted with changing aperture size and f -number configurations of the phased array and qualitatively and quantitatively examined the acoustic pressure variation at the focus due to standing waves. The results demonstrated that the nodes and antinodes of standing wave produced by the small-aperture array were clearly seen at approximately every 3 mm. The effect of the standing wave became more pronounced as the focus was moved closer to skull base. However, a sharp focus was seen for the full array, and there was no such standing-wave pattern in the acoustic plane or near the skull base. This study showed that the fluctuation pressure amplitude would be greatly reduced by using a large-scale, hemispherical phased array with a low f-number.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".