MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416422891 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2025.114130

Machine learning enhanced noninvasive transcranial stroke detection using a portable eddy current damping sensor

2025· article· en· W4416422891 on OpenAlexafffund
Haixu Shen, Seyed Mohammadreza Ghodsi, Benjamin Fixman, Bita Ghodsi, Kirsten Azarraga, Shane Shahrestani, Nerses Sanossian, Gabriel Zada, Yu‐Chong Tai

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthWestern UniversityNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeUniversity of Southern California
KeywordsStroke (engine)Imaging phantomMagnetic resonance imagingNeuroimagingEddy currentElectromagnetic coilDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stroke remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with timely diagnosis critical for effective treatment. Current imaging modalities, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), often face limitations in availability and timeliness, leading to diagnostic delays that worsen patient outcomes. This study presents the development and validation of a portable, noninvasive eddy current damping (ECD) sensor for rapid stroke detection. Building on previous research and optimized through benchtop and phantom studies, this device incorporates advanced coil designs and algorithms to distinguish between hemorrhagic stroke patients and healthy individuals by detecting electrical conductivity variations between normal brain tissue and accumulated blood. Results demonstrate high degrees of accuracy and specificity, promising to enable real-time bedside differentiation of stroke patients. This ECD sensor may expand access to timely stroke care across prehospital, clinical, and remote settings and improve patient outcomes by expediting targeted treatment and rapid triage.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207