The IPASC data format: A consensus data format for photoacoustic imaging
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
Photoacoustic imaging (PAI) is an emerging modality that has shown promise for improving patient management in a range of applications. Unfortunately, the current lack of uniformity in PAI data formats compromises inter-user data exchange and comparison, which impedes: technological progress; effective research collaboration; and efforts to deliver multi-centre clinical trials. To overcome this challenge, the International Photoacoustic Standardisation Consortium (IPASC) has established a data format with a defined consensus metadata structure and developed an open-source software application programming interface (API) to enable conversion from proprietary file formats into the IPASC format. The format is based on Hierarchical Data Format 5 (HDF5) and designed to store photoacoustic raw time series data. Internal quality control mechanisms are included to ensure completeness and consistency of the converted data. By unifying the variety of proprietary data and metadata definitions into a consensus format, IPASC hopes to facilitate the exchange and comparison of PAI data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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