Experimental Validation of the DBIM-TwIST Algorithm for Brain Stroke Detection and Differentiation Using a Multi-Layered Anatomically Complex Head Phantom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an experimental validation of the distorted Born iterative method with the two-step iterative shrinkage thresholding (DBIM-TwIST) algorithm for the problem of brain stroke detection and differentiation, using an anatomically accurate, multi-layer head phantom. To this end, we have developed a gelatine-based, anatomically complex head phantom which mimics various brain tissues and also includes a target mimicking hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke. We simulated the model and setup using CST Microwave Studio and then used our experimental imaging setup to collect numerical and measured data, respectively. We then used our DBIM-TwIST algorithm to reconstruct the dielectric properties of the imaging domain for both simulated and measured data. Results from our CST simulations showed that we are able to locate and reconstruct the permittivity of different stroke targets using an approximate initial guess. Our experimental results demonstrated the potential and challenges for successful detection and differentiation of the stroke targets.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".