MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801798861 · doi:10.1121/1.5036306

Plane-wave vector-flow imaging of adult mouse heart

2018· article· en· W2801798861 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey A. Ketterling, Akshay Shekhar, Orlando Aristizábal, Anthony Podkowa, Billy Y. S. Yiu, Alfred C. H. Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVector flowDoppler effectPlane waveFlow (mathematics)PhysicsAcousticsPlane (geometry)Frame rateOrientation (vector space)OpticsDoppler imagingComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryMedicineImage (mathematics)Image segmentationRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-frequency ultrasound Doppler modes have been used extensively for murine cardiovascular (CV) studies, but traditional linear-array imaging modes are limited in terms of spatial and temporal resolution. Plane-wave imaging methods allow for high-speed vector-flow information to be obtained throughout a full image frame. Plane-wave imaging has been demonstrated in human CV studies, but its use in mouse models has received minimal attention. A Verasonics Vantage with an 18-MHz linear array was used to acquire plane-wave data at a frame rate of 30 kHz from the left ventricle of adult mice. Batches of 3 transmissions spanning ± 5 degrees were sent out. The mouse was placed supine on a heated imaging platform and then 2D + time data sequences. The data were beamformed using standard delay-and-sum methods and vector-flow estimates were obtained at each pixel location using a least-squares, multi-angle Doppler analysis approach. Vortex patterns in the left ventricle were visualized over several heart cycles showing the complex flow in the mouse heart.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207