MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Volume-dependent variations of regional lung sound, amplitude, and phase

2002· article· en· W2137649036 on OpenAlexaff
Hiroshi Kiyokawa, Hans Pasterkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplitudeSound (geography)AcousticsLung volumesBreathingSound transmission classLungVolume (thermodynamics)PhysicsVentilation (architecture)AudiologyMedicineAnatomyInternal medicineOpticsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic imaging of the respiratory system demonstrates regional changes of lung sounds that correspond to pulmonary ventilation. We investigated volume-dependent variations of lung sound phase and amplitude between two closely spaced sensors in five adults. Lung sounds were recorded at the posterior right upper, right lower, and left lower lobes during targeted breathing (1.2 +/- 0.2 l/s; volume = 20-50 and 50-80% of vital capacity) and passive sound transmission (< or =0.2 l/s; volumes as above). Average sound amplitudes were obtained after band-pass filtering to 75-150, 150-300, and 300-600 Hz. Cross correlation established the phase relation of sound between sensors. Volume-dependent variations in phase (< or =1.5 ms) and amplitude (< or =11 dB) were observed at the lower lobes in the 150- to 300-Hz band. During inspiration, increasing delay and amplitude of sound at the caudal relative to the cranial sensor were also observed during passive transmission in several subjects. This previously unrecognized behavior of lung sounds over short distances might reflect spatial variations of airways and diaphragms during breathing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207