MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918660420 · doi:10.1117/12.2508379

Model of malignant breast biopsies and predictions of their WAXS energy integrated signals

2019· article· en· W2918660420 on OpenAlexaff
Robert J. LeClair, Matthew Brunet

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Imaging 2019: Physics of Medical Imaging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceScatteringBiopsyNuclear medicineOpticsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PhysicsChemistryMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical study of the wide angle x-ray scatter (WAXS) energy integrated signals (EISs) from breast biopsies was conducted. A benign biopsy was chosen as fibroglandular (fib) tissue whereas biopsies with cancer were approximated as consisting of fib tissue and a cluster of epithelial cells. The grouping of cells represented the malignant portion. The EISs due to scatter were computed for biopsies of thickness dbio = 2 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm and 20 mm. For the malignant biopsies, the fractional volumes of cells (νcell) studied ranged from 0.01 to 0.1. Incident 2 mm diam beams of 30 kV, 50 kV, 80 kV, and 140 kV were considered. The tube current and exposure time were 3 mA and 1 minute, respectively. The WAXS signals were computed by adding the signals from annular detectors subtending scattering angles θ = 2°, 3°, , 23° and solid angles Ωθ = 2.0 x π x [cos(θ - ∆θ/2) - cos(θ + ∆θ/2)] x cos θ where ∆θ = 1°. Let the EIS due to a malignant biopsy be EISms and that of a benign one, EISbs. With these signals, values of SNR were computed. The 30 kV beam provided SNRs < 5 for the lowest entrance exposure, X = 0.0015 C/kg. For biopsies with dbio = 2, 5, 10, 20 mm and νcell = 0.1, the SNRs were 28.0, 38.2, 43.0, and 40.0. The findings suggest that there is potential to use WAXS EISs to diagnose malignancy in breast biopsies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Imaging 2019: Physics of Medical ImagingSame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207