Investigation of HIFU beam propagation through acoustic holograms in water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated variations in the HIFU beam of a clinical system as it traverses acoustic holograms—small artificial objects of different types—within a tank that was filled in with the degassed deionized water. The pressure distribution within the HIFU beam was assessed in multiple planes perpendicular to the beam axis. The ultrasound transducer with the focal length of 14 cm inside the Sonalleve table top (Profound Medical, Mississauga, ON, Canada) generated the focusing ultrasonic beam, which propagated through the water. Each hologram was positioned 3 cm below the focal plane, with precise adjustments of positions and angles for each measurement. Pressure measurements were conducted using the needle hydrophone HNA-0400 (ONDA Corp, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) mounted on a 3D positioning system. The motors of the positioning system were controlled, and pressure values were recorded using a GUI generated in LabVIEW. The displacement step created by the motors on each axis was 0.01 mm. The properties of the holograms were reconstructed, considering the experimental data obtained. Our findings demonstrated that the shape, size, elasticity, and placement of each acoustic hologram significantly influenced the observed field pattern. This work was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (“MR-HIFU-Pancreas”, FKZ:13GW0364D).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".