MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084030747 · doi:10.1117/12.2041047

Differentiating fatty and non-fatty tissue using photoacoustic imaging

2014· article· en· W2084030747 on OpenAlexafffund
Leo Pan, Robert Rohling, Purang Abolmaesumi, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Shuo Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineChemistryComputer scienceOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we demonstrate a temporal-domain intensity-based photoacoustic imaging method that can differentiate between fatty and non-fatty tissues. PA pressure intensity is partly dependent on the tissue’s speed of sound, which increases as temperature increases in non-fatty tissue and decreases in fatty tissue. Therefore, by introducing a temperature change in the tissue and subsequently monitoring the change of the PA intensity, it is possible to distinguish between the two types of tissue. A commercial ultrasound system with a 128-element 5-14 MHz linear array transducer and a tunable ND:YAG laser were used to produce PA images. Ex-vivo bovine fat and porcine liver tissues were precooled to below 10°C and then warmed to room-temperature over ~1 hour period. A thermocouple monitored the temperature rise while PA images were acquired at 0.5°C intervals. The averaged intensity of the illuminated tissue region at each temperature interval was plotted and linearly fitted. Liver samples showed a mean increase of 2.82 %/°C, whereas bovine fat had a mean decrease of 6.24 %/°C. These results demonstrate that this method has the potential to perform tissue differentiation in the temporal-domain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207