A new CEM₄₃ thermal dose model based on Vogel-Tammann-Fulcher behaviour in thermal damage processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermal dose models are metrics that quantify thermal damage in tissues based on the temperature and the time of exposure. The validity and accuracy of one of the commonly used models (CEM₄₃) for high temperature thermal therapy applications (50-90 degree Celcius) is questionable. It was found to over-estimate the accumulation of thermal damage for high-temperature applications. A new CEM₄₃ dose model based on Arrhenius type Vogel-Tammann-Fulcher equation using published data is introduced in this work. The new dose values for the same damage threshold that was produced at different in-vivo skin experiments were in the same order of magnitude, while the current dose values were 2 orders of magnitude different. The new dose values for same damage threshold in 6 lessions in ex-vivo liver experiments were more consistent than the current dose values. Computer simulations of laser interstitial thermal therapy showed that the current model usually predicts bigger volume than the new model does. The deviation in damaged volume prediction can be significant. The contribution of this work is introducing methods that can lead to more robust thermal dosimetry which will result in improved therapy modelling, monitoring and control.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".