MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014184393 · doi:10.1109/jerm.2020.2983027

Electromagnetic Inversion for Noninvasive Specific Absorption Rate Characterization

2020· article· en· W3014184393 on OpenAlexafffund
Mario Phaneuf, Puyan Mojabi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Electromagnetics RF and Microwaves in Medicine and Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsImaging phantomInversion (geology)Specific absorption rateInverse problemElectromagnetic fieldRegularization (linguistics)InverseComputer scienceAlgorithmElectromagnetic compatibilityAcousticsPhysicsMathematicsOpticsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsGeologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inverse source framework, which comprises a subset of electromagnetic inversion, is applied to the noninvasive specific absorption rate (SAR) characterization problem. An algorithm is developed and presented which takes field measurements external to the phantom and provides the electromagnetic sources required to obtain the SAR distribution. The unique aspect of this inverse source algorithm is that it casts the problem as the simultaneous inversion (SI) of two sets of equivalent currents: one for the device under test (DUT), and the other for the phantom. The dependency of these two sets of currents is then incorporated as an explicit regularization term in the resulting algorithm. The method is proposed to be relatively robust in terms of measurement noise. A simplified two-dimensional problem is presented to support this proposition.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Electromagnetics RF and Microwaves in Medicine and BiologySame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207