MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392940151 · doi:10.1109/tim.2024.3378294

Rapid Prediction of Ablation Zones of Irreversible Electroporation With Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy and Artificial Neural Network in a Heterogeneous Model

2024· article· en· W4392940151 on OpenAlex

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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDielectric spectroscopyArtificial neural networkElectrical impedanceElectroporationMaterials scienceAblationSpectroscopyBiological systemIrreversible electroporationElectrodeBiomedical engineeringNuclear magnetic resonanceElectrochemistryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringChemistryEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we combined electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and artificial neural network (ANN) to predict the ablation zone of irreversible electroporation (IRE) in a heterogeneous plant model. The heterogeneous plant model was built by implanting an exotic material with a different electrical conductivity (copper or wood) into potato cubes. For each heterogeneous model, 55 IRE trials were performed with the pulse strength of 300–1300 V and the pulse number of 30, 60, or 90 (<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$100 \mu \text{s}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> in the pulsewidth and the frequency of 1 Hz) for different positions of exotic implants. The ANN for each model was trained, tested, and validated by a total of 165 experimental data with five inputs (pulse strength, pulse number, implant <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$x$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-/<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$y$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-axis values, and impedance variation parameter) and four outputs (ablation area, major axis length (MaAL), minor axis length (MiAL), and ablation boundary in the first quadrant). Both the experiment and simulation results showed that the two implants with different electrical conductivities could distort the electric field distribution in the plant model. This study concludes that the method combining ANN and EIS can be used to predict the ablation zone of heterogeneous IRE with acceptable accuracy (<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$&gt;$ </tex-math></inline-formula>90%), which might bring a hint to the rapid monitoring of IRE in the treatment of tumors.

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 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 score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.236 · 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