MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111835864 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2020.3043893

Effect of the Acoustic Impedance Mismatch at the Bone-Soft Tissue Interface as a Function of Frequency in Transcranial Ultrasound: A Simulation and <i>In Vitro</i> Experimental Study

2020· article· en· W3111835864 on OpenAlexafffund
Shreyank Gupta, G. Haïat, Catherine Laporte, Pierre Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcousticsMaterials scienceImaging phantomUltrasoundAcoustic impedanceTranscranial DopplerUltrasonic sensorBiomedical engineeringHydrophoneAmplitudeDoppler effectPhysicsOpticsEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasound is a method that uses a handheld low-frequency (2-2.5 MHz), pulsed Doppler phased array probe to measure blood velocity within the arteries located inside the brain. The problem with TCD lies in the low ultrasonic energy penetrating inside the brain through the skull, which leads to a low signal-to-noise ratio. This is due to several effects, including phase aberration, variations in the speed of sound in the skull, scattering, the acoustic impedance mismatch, and absorption of the three-layer medium constituted by soft tissues, the skull, and the brain. The goal of this article is to study the effect of transmission losses due to the acoustic impedance mismatch on the transmitted energies as a function of frequency. To do so, wave propagation was modeled from the ultrasonic transducer into the brain. This model calculates transmission coefficients inside the brain, leading to a frequency-dependent transmission coefficient for a given skin and bone thickness. This approach was validated experimentally by comparing the analytical results with measurements obtained from a bone phantom plate mimicking the skull. The average position error of the occurrence of the maximum amplitude between the experiment and analytical result was equivalent to a 0.06-mm error on the skin thickness given a fixed bone thickness. The similarity between the experimental and analytical results was also demonstrated by calculating correlation coefficients. The average correlation between the experimental and analytical results came out to be 0.50 for a high-frequency probe and 0.78 for a low-frequency probe. Further analysis of the simulation showed that an optimized excitation frequency can be chosen based on skin and bone thicknesses, thereby offering an opportunity to improve the image quality of TCD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.260
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207