MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408236954 · doi:10.1115/1.4068094

A Numerical Study of Gold-Nanorod-Enhanced Noninvasive Laser Ablation for Central Lung Cancer Using an Optical-Thermal-Fluid Model

2025· article· en· W4408236954 on OpenAlexaff
Huishan Liang, Lin Cao, Hongbo Zhang, Wenjun Zhang, Zhiqin Qian, Bing Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueASME Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAblationLaser ablationNanorodLung cancerMaterials scienceLaserThermal ablationThermalMedicineOpticsNanotechnologyPhysicsOncologyInternal medicineThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Central lung cancer presents significant challenges due to its proximity to vital thoracic structures, making traditional treatments often less effective and more harmful. Laser ablation (LA) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive therapy, particularly when enhanced with gold nanorods (GNRs), which possess unique optical properties that amplify the effects of LA. This study introduces a comprehensive optical-thermal-fluid model designed to simulate the spatiotemporal distributions of GNRs and temperature involved in the noninvasive GNR-enhanced LA for central lung cancer. The effects of GNR enhancement on heat transfer and tumor ablation were investigated with regard to three cases of central lung cancer in different sizes and locations. The results demonstrate that GNRs significantly improve the heating efficiency within smaller tumors by concentrating laser energy, thus reducing the time needed to reach therapeutic temperatures. However, in larger tumors, particularly where the tumor size approaches the penetration depth of the laser, the GNRs cause substantial photon absorption near the emission surface, resulting longer treatment durations attributing to heat transfer. Nevertheless, GNRs consistently confine the thermal energy, minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissue in tumors. This study highlights the potential of GNR-enhanced LA as a noninvasive treatment for central lung cancer. It also underscores the importance of considering tumor size in the treatment planning of GNR-enhanced LA.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueASME Journal of Heat and Mass TransferSame topicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207