MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Demonstrating the Utility of a Pipeline for Microwave Breast Image Analysis: A Two-Factor Variation Study

2025· article· W4417132548 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eleonora Razzicchia, Yunxiao Zhang, Ali Farshkaran, Sibi Chakravarthy Shanmugavel, Shwetadwip Chowdhury, Emily Porter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Microwave imagingPipeline (software)MicrowavePermittivityIterative reconstructionImage processingComputation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microwave imaging (MWI) is a promising non-invasive technique for breast cancer screening, utilizing differences in tissue dielectric properties to produce images. This study demonstrates the potential of a pipeline that enables quantitative, high-throughput analysis of reconstructed images. Microwave measurements were simulated in the <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$1-5 \text{GHz}$</tex> frequency range using a simplified breast model, which includes a skin layer encasing homogeneous healthy tissue, with a tumor target embedded in the background. An 8 -antenna array was used to simulate data acquisition while the dielectric properties of the background as well as the tumor location were simultaneously and randomly varied. To conduct the simulation, models were constructed in HFSS, and computations were performed on Compute Canada's supercomputer, enabling efficient processing within a short timeframe. Image reconstruction was achieved using the open-source delay-and-sum (DAS) radar-based imaging algorithm MERIT. Metrics such as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and location error were applied to evaluate image quality. Preliminary results demonstrate the robustness and accuracy of the pipeline, successfully reconstructing tumors across ten scenarios with varying background permittivity and tumor locations. The findings underscore the importance of accurate tissue property modeling, as adjusting the input permittivity to account for the skin layer significantly improved image quality. Additionally, we highlight the effect of tumor position on reconstruction accuracy. In conclusion, this work provides valuable insights into the evaluation of MWI systems, introducing tools and metrics for testing performance and robustness in unknown scenarios.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.271
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207