MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241286473 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2017.8533101

Visualization of Rib and Diaphragm Motion in an Anaesthetized Mouse by Live Animal Synchrotron Imaging

2017· article· en· W4241286473 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gurpreet Kaur Aulakh, Wolfgang M. Kuebler, Baljit Singh, Dean Chapman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsDiaphragm (acoustics)BreathingRib cageMedical imagingVisualizationRadiologyMedicineBiomedical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceAnatomyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulmonary research is challenging because of the lack of visualization of lung airspace by commonly used imaging modalities. Cyclic breathing and motion artifacts due to superimposed ribs and cardiac motion further confound the interpretation of lung imaging data. This is partly responsible for little progress in drug therapy or intervention for many lung diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, and lung cancer. Synchrotron sources can provide soft tissue contrast not available with conventional technologies by making use of phase contrast. Given the advantage of increased flux and narrow energy-range beams of collimated x-rays, there remains challenges in data analysis due to motion artifacts and lack of supporting image analysis algorithms for the correction of them. Therefore, we performed motion analysis of ribs and diaphragm for potential longitudinal functional lung imaging. The system utilized custom x-ray optics at the Canadian Light Source, for full field mouse imaging at 30 frames per second, on the biomedical beamline. This study presents a motion analysis of ribs and diaphragm of a spontaneously breathing anaesthetized mouse. To our knowledge this is the first temporal image analysis done in a spontaneously breathing individual without the aid of ventilation or extensive transducers. This is a feasibility study for future imaging of animal models of pulmonary diseases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207