MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Qualitative Techniques for Generating Spatial Prior Information for Biomedical Microwave Imaging

2020· article· en· W3041005274 on OpenAlexaff
Martina T. Bevacqua, Nasim Abdollahi, Ian Jeffrey, Tommaso Isernia, Joe LoVetri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrowave imagingComputer scienceImage resolutionIterative reconstructionSampling (signal processing)MicrowaveMedical imagingArtificial intelligencePrior probabilityComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of quantitative microwave imaging for biomedical applications represents one of its most relevant application areas due to the specificity of the complex-valued permittivity with regard to differentiating normal and diseased anatomical tissues. The success of such quantitative methods relies on improving their reconstruction accuracy and resolution. In the following we propose the use of two qualitative imaging methods, the linear sampling and the orthogonality sampling methods, to generate spatial priors that are used as a numerical inhomogeneous background medium within the (quantitative) contrast source inversion scheme. Both qualitative imaging methods are able to create morphological maps, in almost real-time, from the same microwave scatteredfield data. The resulting quantitative reconstructions show improvements in both accuracy and resolution, compared to blind reconstruction, and thus the combined technique represents a significant contribution towards the design of simpler and low-cost imaging systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207