MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150175291 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2008.922691

Current Density Impedance Imaging

2008· article· en· W2150175291 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical impedanceMedical imagingCurrent (fluid)BiomagnetismComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringEngineeringMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current density impedance imaging (CDII) is a new impedance imaging technique that can noninvasively measure the conductivity distribution inside a medium. It utilizes current density vector measurements which can be made using a magnetic resonance imager (MRI) (Scott , 1991). CDII is based on a simple mathematical expression for inverted Delta sigma / sigma = inverted Delta ln sigma, the gradient of the logarithm of the conductivity sigma, at each point in a region where two current density vectors J1 and J2 have been measured and J1 x J2 not equal 0. From the calculated inverted Delta ln sigma and a priori knowledge of the conductivity at the boundary, the logarithm of the conductivity ln sigma is integrated by two different methods to produce an image of the conductivity sigma in the region of interest. The CDII technique was tested on three different conductivity phantoms. Much emphasis has been placed on the experimental validation of CDII results against direct bench measurements by commercial LCR meters before and after CDII was performed.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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