MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230222118 · doi:10.1109/imtc.1997.612417

Ultrasonic heating with waveguide interstitial applicator array

2002· article· en· W4230222118 on OpenAlex
B.J. Jarosz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMicrowave-Assisted Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceImaging phantomThermal conductivityUltrasoundUltrasonic sensorWaveguideBiomedical engineeringThermalConductivityAcousticsFinite element methodOpticsComposite materialOptoelectronicsPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasound interstitial applicators can be used for heating tumors near air and bone interfaces where use of non-invasive ultrasound methods becomes difficult. We describe in this paper an ultrasonic waveguide three-applicator array for interstitial waveguide three-applicator array for interstitial thermotherapy. We first discuss the temperature distribution and the pattern of heat deposition using the effective thermal conductivity equation. This equation is used then for finite element analysis of temperature modelling. We discuss heating in porcine brain tissue and present results with the array in a large volume tissue phantom. We compare the simulation results with the experiment. The average difference between measured and simulation temperatures was <0.4/spl deg/C. Finally, we show that the arrays can be useful for thermotherapy if thermal conductivity of the medium is lowered or if modified, more powerful applicators are used.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.195 · 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