MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980808973 · doi:10.1121/1.5126857

Use of magnetic resonance image registration to estimate displacement in the human earcanal due to the insertion of in-ear devices

2019· article· en· W2980808973 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon Benacchio, Olivier Doutres, A. Varoquaux, Éric Wagnac, Arnaud Le Troter, Virginie Callot, Franck Sgard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travailÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersMitacsInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsDisplacement (psychology)UsabilityAcousticsComputer scienceMagnetic resonance imagingAmplitudeComputer visionMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceOpticsPhysicsHuman–computer interactionPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In-ear devices are used in a wide range of applications for which the device's usability and/or efficiency is strongly related to comfort aspects that are influenced by the mechanical interaction between the device and the walls of the earcanal. Although the displacement of the earcanal walls due to the insertion of the device is an important characteristic of this interaction, existing studies on this subject are very limited. This paper proposes a method to estimate this displacement in vivo using a registration technique on magnetic resonance images. The amplitude, the location and the direction of the earcanal wall displacement are computed for four types of earplugs used by one participant. These displacements give indications on how each earplug deforms the earcanal for one specific earcanal geometry and one specific earplug insertion. Although the displacement due to a specific earplug family cannot be generalized using the results of this paper, the latter help to understand where, how much, and how each studied earplug deforms the earcanal of the participant. This method is revealed as a promising tool to investigate further acoustical and physical comfort aspects of in-ear devices.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207