A non-invasive approach to skin cancer diagnosis via graphene electrical tattoos and electrical impedance tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. Making up one of the largest shares of diagnosed cancers worldwide, skin cancer is also one of the most treatable. However, this is contingent upon early diagnosis and correct skin cancer-type differentiation. Currently, methods for early detection that are accurate, rapid, and non-invasive are limited. However, literature demonstrating the impedance differences between benign and malignant skin cancers, as well as between different types of skin cancer, show that methods based on impedance differentiation may be promising. Approach. In this work, we propose a novel approach to rapid and non-invasive skin cancer diagnosis that leverages the technologies of difference-based electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and graphene electronic tattoos (GETs). Main results. We demonstrate the feasibility of this first-of-its-kind system using both computational numerical and experimental skin phantom models. We considered variations in skin cancer lesion impedance, size, shape, and position relative to the electrodes and evaluated the impact of using individual and multi-electrode GET (mGET) arrays. The results demonstrate that this approach has the potential to differentiate based on lesion impedance, size, and position, but additional techniques are needed to determine shape. Significance. In this way, the system proposed in this work, which combines both EIT and GET technology, exhibits potential as an entirely non-invasive and rapid approach to skin cancer diagnosis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".