<i>In vitro</i>characterization of the subharmonic ultrasound signal from Definity microbubbles at high frequencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasound microbubble contrast agents have been demonstrated to scatter subharmonic energy at one-half the driving frequency. At ultrasound frequencies in the 20-40 MHz range, the subharmonic offers the potential to differentiate the blood in the microcirculation from the surrounding tissue. It is unknown whether current contrast agents, manufactured to be resonant between 2 and 12 MHz, are ideal for subharmonic imaging at higher frequencies. We performed numerical simulations of the Keller-Miksis model for the behavior of a single bubble and experimental investigations of Definity microbubbles in water. The results supported the hypothesis that off-resonant bubbles, excited at their second harmonic, may be primarily responsible for the observed subharmonic energy. For frequencies between 20 and 32 MHz and 32 and 40 MHz, the optimal bubble diameters for the generation of subharmonics in vitro were determined experimentally to be 1.2-5 microm and less than 1.2 microm, respectively. Definity may be a suitable ultrasound contrast agent for subharmonic imaging at 20 MHz with peak-negative pressures between 380 and 590 kPa and pulses greater than or equal to four cycles in duration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".