MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567275816 · doi:10.1109/iros.2016.7759361

A Progressive Multidimensional Particle Swarm Optimizer for magnetic core placement in Dipole Field Navigation

2016· article· en· W2567275816 on OpenAlexaff
Maxime Latulippe, Sylvain Martel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMicro and Nano Robotics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceInverse problemAlgorithmMathematical optimizationInverseSwarm behaviourField (mathematics)ScannerPath (computing)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper tackles the inverse problem of finding optimal configurations of magnetic gradient sources in Dipole Field Navigation (DFN), a magnetic navigation method proposed recently for the direct targeting of drugs. In DFN, a limited number of these gradient sources, called the cores, must be positioned properly around a patient in a Magnetic Resonance Imaging scanner to induce the required directional forces on the navigated therapeutic carriers. To overcome some limitations of the previous approach for solving this problem, here we propose a novel and conceptually simple multidimensional variant of the well-known Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm. This variant, called Progressive Multidimensional PSO (PMD-PSO), enables a tradeoff between the quality and the complexity of the solutions by progressively increasing the number of dimensions in the search space. We apply this algorithm to the core placement problem using an improved fitness function for the evaluation of a core configuration given a vascular path towards a target. Experiments on simulated vasculatures show that, while the approach can effectively solve this inverse problem, PMD-PSO exhibits better performances for DFN compared with two other multidimensional PSO variants.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicro and Nano RoboticsFrench-language works237,207