MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533220720 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2016.2620381

Multifrequency Interlaced CMUTs for Photoacoustic Imaging

2016· article· en· W2533220720 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan K. W. Chee, Peiyu Zhang, Mohammad Maadi, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates
KeywordsCapacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducersTransducerMaterials scienceAcousticsHigh frequency ultrasoundUltrasonic sensorSensitivity (control systems)Low frequencyImage resolutionWidebandOpticsUltrasoundComputer sciencePhysicsElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multifrequency capacitive micromachined ultrasound transducers (CMUTs) are introduced consisting of interlaced 82- [Formula: see text] (low frequency) and 36- [Formula: see text] (high frequency) membranes. The membranes have been interlaced on a scale smaller than the shortest wavelength of operation allowing several advantages over other multifrequency transducer designs including aligned beam profiles, optimal imaging resolution, and minimal grating lobes. The low- and high-frequency CMUTs operate at 1.74 and 5.04 MHz in immersion, respectively. Multifrequency transducers have applications in wideband photoacoustic (PA) imaging where multifrequency transducers are better able to detect both high- and low-frequency PA frequency content. The PA frequency content is target size dependent, which means traditional high-frequency transducers have less sensitivity to larger objects such as diffuse contrast agents. We demonstrate that the low-frequency subarrays are able to better visualize diffuse agent distributions, while the high-frequency subarrays offer fine-resolution imaging important for microvascular imaging and structural navigation. Spectroscopically unmixed images superimpose high sensitivity images of agent concentrations (acquired using low-frequency subarrays) onto high-resolution images of microvessel-mimicking phantoms (acquired using high-frequency subarrays).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207