MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315197036 · doi:10.1177/0161734612456545

High-Frequency Annular Array Fabrication Using a Flex Circuit Matching Layer

2012· article· en· W2315197036 on OpenAlexaff
Holly S. Lay, Eric Simpson, Greg Griffin, Geoffrey R. Lockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasonic Imaging · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceTransducerFabricationInsertion lossOptoelectronicsElectrical conductorOpticsCenter frequencyElectrodeLayer (electronics)Bandwidth (computing)PolyimideAcousticsComputer scienceBand-pass filterTelecommunicationsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fabricating arrays for high-frequency image applications such as ophthalmic imaging, intravascular imaging, and small animal imaging is challenging. For example, an array for intravascular imaging must be small enough to fit within the lumen of a catheter and inexpensive enough to be discarded after a single use. This article presents a new method for fabricating high-frequency annular arrays that is simple and inexpensive. The annular array elements are defined by the electrode pattern on a back surface of a polyimide quarter-wavelength matching layer that is glued to the front face of a ceramic transducer substrate (PZT5H). Electrical losses associated with bonding the matching layer to the transducer substrate are reduced by fabricating a second set of electrodes on the transducer substrate and then bonding the substrates using an anisotropic conductive epoxy. The feasibility of this technique was established by fabricating a seven-element, 20-MHz, 5-mm diameter annular array. The prototype array produced a pulse with a -6-dB factional bandwidth of 50%, an insertion loss of 22 dB, and secondary lobes in the radiation pattern at f/2 that decreased to -65 dB with respect to the main lobe with a peak amplitude of -53 dB.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasonic ImagingSame topicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207