MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410738080 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2025.3572800

Global Maxwell Tomography Using the Volume-Surface Integral Equation for Improved Estimation of Electrical Properties

2025· article· en· W4410738080 on OpenAlexaff
Ilias I. Giannakopoulos, José E. Cruz Serrallés, Jan Paška, Martijn A. Cloos, Ryan Brown, Riccardo Lattanzi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institutes of HealthCenter for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research
KeywordsIntegral equationMaxwell's equationsTomographySurface (topology)Volume (thermodynamics)Electrical capacitance tomographyMathematical analysisPhysicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsOpticsGeometryCapacitanceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Global Maxwell Tomography (GMT) is a noninvasive inverse optimization method for the estimation of electrical properties (EP) from magnetic resonance (MR) measurements. GMT uses the volume integral equation (VIE) in the forward problem and assumes that the sample has negligible effect on the coil currents. Consequently, GMT calculates the coil's incident fields with an initial EP distribution and keeps them constant for all optimization iterations. This can lead to erroneous reconstructions. This work introduces a novel version of GMT that replaces VIE with the volume-surface integral equation (VSIE), which recalculates the coil currents at every iteration based on updated EP estimates before computing the associated fields. METHODS: We simulated an 8-channel transceiver coil array for 7 T brain imaging and reconstructed the EP of a realistic head model using VSIE-based GMT. We built the coil, collected experimental MR measurements, and reconstructed EP of a two-compartment phantom. RESULTS: In simulations, VSIE-based GMT outperformed VIE-based GMT by at least 12% for both EP. In experiments, the relative difference with respect to probe-measured EP values in the inner (outer) compartment was 13% (26%) and 17% (33%) for the permittivity and conductivity, respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of VSIE over VIE enhances GMT's performance by accounting for the effect of the EP on the coil currents. SIGNIFICANCE: VSIE-based GMT does not rely on an initial EP estimate, rendering it more suitable for experimental reconstructions compared to the VIE-based GMT.

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 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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207