MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2481808791 · doi:10.1118/1.4953636

Experimental feasibility of multistatic holography for breast microwave radar image reconstruction

2016· article· en· W2481808791 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsCancerCare ManitobaForming Technologies (Canada)Queen's UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterMicrowave imagingMultistatic radarRadarImage resolutionRadar imagingComputer scienceMicrowaveIterative reconstructionBistatic radarRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceGeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess the experimental feasibility of circular multistatic holography, a novel breast microwave radar reconstruction approach, using experimental datasets recorded using a preclinical experimental setup. The performance of this approach was quantitatively evaluated by calculating the signal to clutter ratio (SCR), contrast to clutter ratio (CCR), tumor to fibroglandular response ratio (TFRR), spatial accuracy, and reconstruction time. METHODS: Five datasets were recorded using synthetic phantoms with the dielectric properties of breast tissue in the 1-6 GHz range using a custom radar system developed by the authors. The datasets contained synthetic structures that mimic the dielectric properties of fibroglandular breast tissues. Four of these datasets the authors covered an 8 mm inclusion that emulated a tumor. A custom microwave radar system developed at the University of Manitoba was used to record the radar responses from the phantoms. The datasets were reconstructed using the proposed multistatic approach as well as with a monostatic holography approach that has been previously shown to yield the images with the highest contrast and focal quality. RESULTS: For all reconstructions, the location of the synthetic tumors in the experimental setup was consistent with the position in the both the monostatic and multistatic reconstructed images. The average spatial error was less than 4 mm, which is half the spatial resolution of the data acquisition system. The average SCR, CCR, and TFRR of the images reconstructed with the multistatic approach were 15.0, 9.4, and 10.0 dB, respectively. In comparison, monostatic images obtained using the datasets from the same experimental setups yielded average SCR, CCR, and TFRR values of 12.8, 4.9, and 5.9 dB. No artifacts, defined as responses generated by the reconstruction method of at least half the energy of the tumor signatures, were noted in the multistatic reconstructions. The average execution time of the images formed using the proposed approach was 4 s, which is one order of magnitude faster than the current state-of-the-art time-domain multistatic breast microwave radar reconstruction algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: The images generated by the proposed method show that multistatic holography is capable of forming spatially accurate images in real-time with signal to clutter levels and contrast values higher than other published monostatic and multistatic cylindrical radar reconstruction approaches. In comparison to the monostatic holographic approach, the images generated by the proposed multistatic approach had SCR values that were at least 50% higher. The multistatic images had CCR and TFRR values at least 200% greater than those formed using a monostatic approach.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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