MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158048787 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2008.2003103

Real-Time Management of Faulty Electrodes in Electrical Impedance Tomography

2008· article· en· W2158048787 on OpenAlexaff
Alzbeta E. Hartinger, R. Guardo, Andy Adler, Hervé Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical impedance tomographyElectrical impedanceElectrodeComputer scienceReciprocity (cultural anthropology)VoltageSensitivity (control systems)Iterative reconstructionArtificial intelligenceElectrical resistivity tomographyA priori and a posterioriElectrical engineeringElectronic engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Completely or partially disconnected electrodes are a fairly common occurrence in many electrical impedance tomography (EIT) clinical applications. Several factors can contribute to electrode disconnection: patient movement, perspiration, manipulations by clinical staff, and defective electrode leads or electronics. By corrupting several measurements, faulty electrodes introduce significant image artifacts. In order to properly manage faulty electrodes, it is necessary to: 1) account for invalid data in image reconstruction algorithms and 2) automatically detect faulty electrodes. This paper presents a two-part approach for real-time management of faulty electrodes based on the principle of voltage-current reciprocity. The first part allows accounting for faulty electrodes in EIT image reconstruction without a priori knowledge of which electrodes are at fault. The method properly weights each measurement according to its compliance with the principle of voltage-current reciprocity. Results show that the algorithm is able to automatically determine the valid portion of the data and use it to calculate high-quality images. The second part of the approach allows automatic real-time detection of at least one faulty electrode with 100% sensitivity and two faulty electrodes with 80% sensitivity enabling the clinical staff to fix the problem as soon as possible to minimize data loss.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations41
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207