MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734856964

Biophotoacoustic Radar: Study of Tissue Phantoms, Tissues, Contrast Agent and Comparison to Ultrasound Imaging for Deep Subsurface Imaging

2012· dissertation· en· W2734856964 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rudolf Alwi

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsContrast (vision)UltrasoundUltrasound imagingBiomedical engineeringMedicineRadiologyComputer scienceComputer vision
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the imaging capability of our frequency-domain photoacoustic (FD-PA) system that utilizes correlation processing alias “photoacoustic radar” and ultrasonic phased array for imaging of soft tissues. The probe imaging capabilities were studied using tissue-mimicking phantoms, tissue samples ex vivo, blood vessels in a human wrist and a rat tumour model in vivo. Our experimental results have shown decent image correlation between our FD-PA and a clinical ultrasound modality. In comparison with ultrasound, we have also demonstrated strong potential of the FD-PA for deep (~15 mm) subsurface imaging with excellent contrast and high signal-to-noise ratio. Additionally, we assessed the potential of silica-coated super paramagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPION) as a novel PA contrast agent. Detection of the nanoparticles up to 24 mm inside an optically tissue-like turbid media and about 5-fold PA signal amplification due to their presence in sheep blood (~1.4 mg/ml) are presented.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207