MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386798758 · doi:10.1134/s1063771023600468

The Use of Focused Ultrasound Beams with Shocks to Suppress Diffusion Effects in Volumetric Thermal Ablation of Biological Tissue

2023· article· en· W4386798758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. A. Pestova, Maria M. Karzova, Petr V. Yuldashev, Vera A. Khokhlova

Bibliographic record

VenueAcoustical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceRADIUSTransverse planeThermal diffusivityThermal conductionThermal ablationAblationDiffusionMechanicsThermalOpticsBiomedical engineeringPhysicsComposite materialMedicineRadiologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents the results of numerical simulation of an experiment on irradiating ex vivo bovine liver sample by the therapeutic array of the MR-HIFU clinical system (Sonalleve V1 3.0T, Profound Medical Corp., Canada). Continuous quasi-linear and pulsed shock-wave exposures with the same time-averaged power are compared. Volumetric thermal lesions were generated by moving the focus of the array in its focal plane along discrete trajectories consisting of two or four concentric circles with a maximum radius of 4 mm. The effect of using the criteria for controlling the thermal dose during treatment and ending the sonication on the shape, volume, and exposure time of generating thermal lesion were analyzed. The acoustic field in tissue was calculated using the Westervelt equation; the temperature field was simulated with the inhomogeneous heat conduction equation; and the lesion boundary was determined according to the thermal dose threshold. In the quasi-linear mode corresponding to the clinical one, thermal diffusion leads to elongation of the lesion by a factor of 2–3 along the beam axis compared to the transverse dimension of the trajectory. The use of pulsed shock-wave exposures with switching off the inner circles of the trajectory as they reach the threshold value of the thermal dose makes it possible to significantly suppress the thermal diffusion effects in the axial direction of the beam and obtain localized thermal lesion of a given shape with a thermal ablation rate comparable to the clinical case.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcoustical PhysicsSame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207