MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119235770 · doi:10.1109/cibec.2008.4786110

Development of Anatomically Realistic Whole-Body Models of Children and their Use in Electromagnetic Dosimetry

2008· article· en· W2119235770 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tomoaki Nagaoka, Soichi Watanabe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Information and Communications TechnologyVector Institute
KeywordsDosimetryComputer scienceSegmentationImage resolutionSpecific absorption rateQuality (philosophy)Ultra high frequencyWirelessComputer visionSimulationArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsMedicinePhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there has been an increased concern regarding the effects of electromagnetic radiation emanating from wireless communication devices on the health of children. In order to determine safe levels of exposure, we intend to use computer simulations and numerical human models to estimate the specific absorption rate (SAR) in young children. However, only a few of the existing numerical models of young children are of the same quality and resolution as anatomically realistic adult models. Therefore, for accurate dosimetry in young children, we have developed anatomically realistic whole-body models using MRI data obtained from healthy three- and seven-year-old volunteers. Our model has a resolution of approximately 2 mm and is segmented into approximately 50 tissues and organs. First, we performed semiautomatic approximate segmentation using an image segmentation tool. Then, detailed segmentation was manually performed by health professionals. Finally, the positions and shapes of the segmented tissues were verified by a pediatric radiologist. The quality of our models is equal to or higher than that of adult models. Our models can be used to perform highly precise numerical simulations for studies on children. In this paper, we also present the basic SAR characteristics of our models at VHF/UHF frequencies.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207