MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594998909 · doi:10.1063/1.4977653

Noninvasive tissue temperature estimation using nonlinear ultrasound harmonics

2017· article· en· W2594998909 on OpenAlexaff
B. Maraghechi, Michael C. Kolios, Jahangir Tavakkoli

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsNonlinear systemAcousticsHarmonic analysisUltrasoundComputer scienceMaterials scienceElectronic engineeringPhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-invasive tissue temperature estimation is important in thermal therapies for having an efficient treatment. A noninvasive ultrasonic technique for monitoring tissue temperature changes is proposed based on the changes in the harmonics of ultrasound backscatter as a function of temperature. The backscattered pressure amplitudes of the fundamental frequency (p1), the second (p2) and the third (p3) harmonics generated by nonlinear ultrasound propagation and the ratios of the second and the third harmonics over the fundamental frequency (p2/p1 and p3/p1) were investigated as a function of temperature. The acoustic harmonics were generated and detected with a commercial high frequency ultrasound imaging system in pulse-echo mode. The experiments were performed on tissue-mimicking gel phantoms and ex vivo bovine muscle tissues. The temperature was increased from 26°C to 46°C in increments of 2°C. The average values of p1, p2, p3, p2/p1, p3/p1 increased by 14%, 50%, 117%, 37% and 92% for the gel phantoms, and for the tissue samples increased by 29%, 50%, 170%, 10% and 109%, respectively. The results indicate that the harmonic amplitudes and their ratios are highly sensitive to propagation medium’s temperature and could potentially be used for noninvasive ultrasound thermometry.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207