MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896178307 · doi:10.1121/1.5068027

Bone guided-wave ultrasonography: How far are we from clinical implementation?

2018· article· en· W2896178307 on OpenAlexaff
Lawrence H. Le, Tho N.H.T. Tran, Kim-Cuong T. Nguyen, Mauricio D. Sacchi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcousticsShear wavesUltrasonographyUltrasonic sensorUltrasoundCortical boneTransmitterLongitudinal waveTransducerComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceWave propagationOpticsPhysicsShear (geology)MedicineTelecommunicationsRadiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone guided-wave ultrasonography uses mechanical waves to study the long cortical bones. Long cortex has soft tissues above and marrow below acting like an ultrasound waveguide. The reverberations of the longitudinal and shear waves within the waveguide interfere constructively to generate energetic ultrasonic guided waves (UGW) travelling along the cortex. The UGW can be generated and recorded using an axial transmission technique with the transmitter and receiver deployed axially along the axis of the long bone on the skin’s surface. The UGW thus acquired can be analyzed to provide information relevant to thickness and mechanical properties of the long bone. In this communication, we present an update of our research efforts on bone guided-wave ultrasonography including data acquisition, multichannel signal processing, bone modeling, and implementation of inversion algorithms to recover cortical thickness and mechanical parameters from UGW data. We also present some technical challenges, which will call for the joint effort of the bone ultrasound community to advance the science.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.023
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0140.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.011

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207