Viscoelasticity Imaging of Biological Tissues and Single Cells Using Shear Wave Propagation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it