Viscoelasticity Imaging of Biological Tissues and Single Cells Using Shear Wave Propagation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in biomechanical properties of biological soft tissues are often associated with physiological dysfunctions. Since biological soft tissues are hydrated, viscoelasticity is likely suitable to represent its solid-like behavior using elasticity and fluid-like behavior using viscosity. Shear wave elastography is a non-invasive imaging technology invented for clinical applications that has shown promise to characterize various tissue viscoelasticity. It is based on measuring and analyzing velocities and attenuations of propagated shear waves. In this review, principles and technical developments of shear wave elastography for viscoelasticity characterization from organ to cellular levels are presented, and different imaging modalities used to track shear wave propagation are described. At a macroscopic scale, techniques for inducing shear waves using an external mechanical vibration, an acoustic radiation pressure or a Lorentz force are reviewed along with imaging approaches proposed to track shear wave propagation, namely ultrasound, magnetic resonance, optical, and photoacoustic means. Then, approaches for theoretical modeling and tracking of shear waves are detailed. Following it, some examples of applications to characterize the viscoelasticity of various organs are given. At a microscopic scale, a novel cellular shear wave elastography method using an external vibration and optical microscopy is illustrated. Finally, current limitations and future directions in shear wave elastography are presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".