MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404238435 · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3496117

Microstrip Patch Antennas for Breast Tumor/Cancer Cell Detection–Challenges, Designs, and Future Opportunities: A Review

2024· review· en· W4404238435 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 Access · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrostrip antennaComputer scienceMicrostripBreast cancerElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsAntenna (radio)CancerEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is a major killer of women worldwide and one of the leading causes of death overall. It involves the progressive abnormal growth of breast tissue which, if detected at an early stage, can be diagnosed as a tumor. Traditional breast cancer screening methods, such as X-ray mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound scanning, present several drawbacks, making them less than ideal. These drawbacks include high costs, exposure to potentially hazardous radiation, and patient inconvenience. Due to these challenges, researchers have been motivated to seek alternative methods, one of which involves the application of microwave technology. In recent years, wearable and flexible patch antennas have gained popularity due to their appealing characteristics and the potential to develop lightweight, compact, low-cost, and adaptable solutions for biomedical applications. This article provides an overview of microwave approaches for breast tumor detection using microstrip patch antennas. In particular, recent advancements in active microwave imaging and microwave-based methods are reviewed. The primary goal of this work is to offer researchers and medical professionals an understanding of the underlying principles, techniques, and challenges associated with microwave imaging for breast tumor/cancer detection. Additionally, this study aims to highlight the fact that, as of now, commercially available, cost-effective microwave-based technologies for imaging or detecting breast tumors/cancer are relatively scarce. This observation is not meant to imply that microwave technology is ineffective for breast tumor/cancer diagnosis; rather, it seeks to spark a constructive discussion about why, despite years of dedicated research, a widely accessible commercial technology has yet to be made available.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.212 · 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