MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463415542 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/61/15/5724

A rapid magnetic resonance acoustic radiation force imaging sequence for ultrasonic refocusing

2016· article· en· W2463415542 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Mougenot, Samuel Pichardo, Steven Engler, Adam C. Waspe, Elodie Constanciel Colas, James M. Drake

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoThunder Bay Regional Research InstituteHospital for Sick ChildrenLakehead UniversityPhilips (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain CanadaFocused Ultrasound Foundation
KeywordsAcoustic radiation forceMagnetic resonance imagingUltrasoundMaterials scienceUltrasonic sensorAcousticsDisplacement (psychology)Distortion (music)Biomedical engineeringNuclear magnetic resonancePhysicsRadiologyMedicineOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic resonance guided acoustic radiation force imaging (MR-ARFI) is being used to correct for aberrations induced by tissue heterogeneities when using high intensity focusing ultrasound (HIFU). A compromise between published MR-ARFI adaptive solutions is proposed to achieve efficient refocusing of the ultrasound beam in under 10 min. In addition, an ARFI sequence based on an EPI gradient echo sequence was used to simultaneously monitor displacement and temperature with a large SNR and low distortion. This study was conducted inside an Achieva 3T clinical MRI using a Philips Sonalleve MR-HIFU system to emit a 1 ms pulsed sonication with duty cycle of 2.3% at 300 Wac inside a polymer phantom. Virtual elements defined by a Hadamard array with sonication patterns composed of 6 phase steps were used to characterize 64 groups of 4 elements to find the optimal phase of the 256 elements of the transducer. The 384 sonication patterns were acquired in 580 s to identify the set of phases that maximize the displacement at the focal point. Three aberrators (neonatal skull, 8 year old skull and a checkered pattern) were added to each sonication pattern to evaluate the performance of this refocusing algorithm (n = 4). These aberrators reduced the relative intensities to 95.3%, 69.6% and 25.5% for the neonatal skull, 8 year old skull, and checkered pattern virtual aberrators respectively. Using a 10 min refocusing algorithm, relative intensities of 101.6%, 91.3% and 93.3% were obtained. Better relative intensities of 103.9%, 94.3% and 101% were achieved using a 25 min refocusing algorithm. An average temperature increase of 4.2 °C per refocusing test was induced for the 10 min refocusing algorithm, resulting in a negligible thermal dose of 2 EM. A rapid refocusing of the beam can be achieved while keeping thermal effects to a minimum.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207