MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123193035 · doi:10.1002/bem.20694

Safety assessment of ultra‐wideband antennas for microwave breast imaging

2011· article· en· W2123193035 on OpenAlexaff
Valerio De Santis, J.M. Sill, Jeremie Bourqui, Elise Fear

Bibliographic record

VenueBioelectromagnetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUltra-widebandAntenna (radio)Electronic engineeringMicrowaveMicrowave imagingRadarBreast imagingTelecommunicationsEngineeringMammographyMedicineBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with the safety assessment of several ultra-wideband (UWB) antenna designs for use in prototype microwave breast imaging systems. First, the performances of the antennas are validated by comparison of measured and simulated data collected for a simple test case. An efficient approach to estimating the specific energy absorption (SA) is introduced and validated. Next, SA produced by the UWB antennas inside more realistic breast models is computed. In particular, the power levels and pulse repetition periods adopted for the SA evaluation follow the measurement protocol employed by a tissue sensing adaptive radar (TSAR) prototype system. Results indicate that the SA for the antennas examined is below limits prescribed in standards for exposure of the general population; however, the difficulties inherent in applying such standards to UWB exposures are discussed. The results also suggest that effective tools for the rapid evaluation of new sensors have been developed.

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)0.004
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioelectromagneticsSame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207