MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407573307 · doi:10.1117/12.3048781

Polyvinyl alcohol cryogels (PVA-C): preparation and multimodal imaging applications

2025· article· en· W4407573307 on OpenAlexaff
Olivia Qi, T.M. Peters, John Moore, Elvis C. S. Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyvinyl alcoholMaterials scienceChemical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyvinyl alcohol cryogel (PVA-C) is a widely used tissue-mimicking material in medical imaging phantoms, essential for evaluating imaging techniques, training clinicians, and simulating anatomical tissue structures. Its tunable mechanical and imaging properties make it valuable for multimodal imaging. However, PVA-C phantom reproducibility remains challenging due to fabrication variations, including inconsistencies in freeze-thaw cycle (FTC) conditions, PVA concentration, and imaging additives. This study systematically examines how PVA concentration, FTC profiles, and contrast-enhancing additives affect the mechanical and imaging properties of PVA-C phantoms in ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT). Using in-house experiments and a comprehensive literature review, we analyze FTC conditions’ role in modulating stiffness, attenuation, and relaxation times. We also assess contrast agents such as barium sulfate, gadolinium, and silica-based scatterers on imaging visibility and result. Our findings identify optimal fabrication conditions that enhance PVA-C phantom reproducibility and performance across imaging modalities. Our findings offer a comprehensive framework for optimizing PVA-C phantoms, ensuring reliable multimodal imaging applications.

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)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors→French-language works237,207→