MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769294299 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2017.8092905

Multi-frequency CMUT imaging arrays for multi-scale imaging and imaging-therapy applications

2017· article· en· W2769294299 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Maadi, Benjamin Greenlay, Christopher Ceroici, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

Venue2017 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducersTransducerAcousticsUltrasonic sensorMaterials scienceSecond-harmonic imaging microscopyPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineHigh frequency ultrasoundOptoacoustic imagingUltrasoundBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceOpticsPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-frequency transducers may have a number of emerging applications including multi-scale imaging, superharmonc contrast imaging and imaging-therapy applications. For imaging-therapy applications low-frequencies are typically needed for therapeutic heating or contrast agent destruction, while higher-frequencies are required for high-resolution imaging. However, development of these multi-frequency transducers is challenging owing to disparate focal zones or difficult acoustic impedance matching. Recently we introduced CMUT-based multi-frequency transducers with small- and large- membranes interlaced on a scale smaller than the acoustic wavelengths. We have demonstrated the utility of small feasibility arrays for multi-band photoacoustic imaging but have yet to demonstrate co-aligned low-and-high frequency pulse-echo ultrasound with larger arrays.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2017 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS)Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207