MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161712910 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2011.2131674

Travelling Wave Expansion: A Model Fitting Approach to the Inverse Problem of Elasticity Reconstruction

2011· article· en· W2161712910 on OpenAlexaff
A. Baghani, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Mohammad Honarvar, Ramin S. Sahebjavaher, Robert Rohling, Ralph Sinkus

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElasticity (physics)Inverse problemMathematical analysisWave speedShear (geology)Inversion (geology)Scalar (mathematics)Shear wavesMagnetic resonance elastographyInverseMathematicsWave equationPhysicsGeometryElastographyAcousticsGeologyUltrasound

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel approach to the problem of elasticity reconstruction is introduced. In this approach, the solution of the wave equation is expanded as a sum of waves travelling in different directions sharing a common wave number. In particular, the solutions for the scalar and vector potentials which are related to the dilatational and shear components of the displacement respectively are expanded as sums of travelling waves. This solution is then used as a model and fitted to the measured displacements. The value of the shear wave number which yields the best fit is then used to find the elasticity at each spatial point. The main advantage of this method over direct inversion methods is that, instead of taking the derivatives of noisy measurement data, the derivatives are taken on the analytical model. This improves the results of the inversion. The dilatational and shear components of the displacement can also be computed as a byproduct of the method, without taking any derivatives. Experimental results show the effectiveness of this technique in magnetic resonance elastography. Comparisons are made with other state-of-the-art techniques.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207