Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Visual Surface Wave Elastography: Revealing Subsurface Physical Properties via Visible Surface Waves

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Visual Surface Wave Elastography shows that a video of surface waves carries enough information to recover the thickness and stiffness of a soft tissue layer over bone.

desk verdict Solid physics-based pipeline for video surface-wave elastography; thickness inference is convincing, stiffness validation is honest but weaker than the abstract implies. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09207 v1 pith:U4AI3LSP submitted 2025-07-12 cs.CV

Alexander C. Ogren , Berthy T. Feng , Jihoon Ahn , Katherine L. Bouman , Chiara Daraio This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords surfacewaveelastographydispersionrelationvideo-basedmaterialcharacterizationtissuestiffnessestimationthicknessphase-basedmotionprocessingBloch-Floquetboundaryconditionsstructuralsimilarityindex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes that a plain video camera can measure what lies beneath a surface: specifically, the thickness and stiffness of a soft tissue layer such as skin, fat, and muscle over bone. It claims this is possible because surface waves are dispersive, meaning different wavelengths travel at different speeds, and the entire frequency-wavenumber relationship, called the dispersion relation, is determined by the layer's thickness and stiffness. The method extracts this dispersion relation from video with sub-pixel motion processing and a 2D FFT, then solves an inverse problem by generating physics-based dispersion relations for candidate thickness-stiffness pairs and choosing the one that best matches observation. Validation on simulated and real gelatin phantoms recovers thicknesses within caliper measurements and stiffness within 1.2% of rheometry values, and a simulated 3D human leg shows recovery of spatially varying thickness. If true, this is a step toward at-home health monitoring and camera-based material characterization without specialized ultrasound or MRI equipment.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dispersion relation, the set of frequency-wavenumber pairs $(\omega,\gamma)$ describing all wave modes a medium supports; for the assumed two-layer model the paper shows this set is uniquely fixed by thickness $T$ and stiffness $E$. The relation is computed by solving the harmonic elastic wave equation with Bloch-Floquet, or phase-shifted, periodic boundary conditions, and the observed version is obtained from video by a 2D FFT of phase-based motion estimates. The inversion is carried out by maximizing the structural similarity index, or SSIM, between the observed dispersion image and the image of hypothesized dispersion curves, solved by grid search. Dimensionless characteristic numbers such as $\pi_1 = \gamma L$ and $\pi_6 = \gamma T$ are introduced in the discussion to describe when the observation window, sampling rates, and finite-element mesh are adequate.

What would settle it

Build two gelatin phantoms with the same measured thickness and stiffness but different densities, for example by adding glycerol to one, run VSWE with the paper's fixed $\rho = 1\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$ assumption, and check whether the recovered thickness and stiffness stay the same; if they shift with density, the inversion's prior on density is doing real work and real-tissue density variations will bias results.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that wave motion visible at the surface of a soft-over-hard layered medium carries enough information to recover the unknown thickness $T$ and elastic modulus $E$ of the soft layer from video alone. Under standard biomechanical assumptions, a uniform isotropic linear-elastic layer of known density and Poisson's ratio resting on a rigid foundation, with waves traveling horizontally, the dispersion relation $D(T,E)$ is fully determined by $T$ and $E$. The paper shows that a dispersion relation extracted from video via phase-based motion processing and a 2D FFT can be matched against numerically computed dispersion relations, and that maximizing the structural similarity index between observed and hypothesized dispersion images yields accurate parameter estimates. The evidence includes sensitivity to 5% parameter changes in plane-strain simulations, agreement with caliper and rheometry ground truth on real gelatin phantoms, and agreement with known thickness distributions in a full 3D simulation of a human calf.

Load-bearing premise

The inversion assumes the medium is one uniform elastic layer of known density and Poisson's ratio on a rigid base, with waves traveling in a single horizontal direction; real anatomy is curved, graded or anisotropic, and nonuniform in thickness, so any deviation biases the recovered $(T,E)$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A camera alone, without ultrasound, MRI, or contact sensors, can recover coarse estimates of tissue thickness and stiffness in a soft-over-hard layered medium.
  • In plane-strain simulations, the method distinguishes parameter changes as small as 5%, so it can track small variations that may be clinically relevant.
  • On real gelatin phantoms, estimated thicknesses fall within the caliper confidence interval and stiffness within 1.2% of the rheometry range across a range of temperatures.
  • On a simulated 3D human leg, sweeping observation windows recover a spatially varying thickness distribution while also recovering the constant stiffness throughout the calf.
  • The characteristic numbers give a scaling recipe: preserving dimensionless groups such as spatial and temporal sampling relative to wavelength and frequency maintains performance even when the object or video parameters are very different.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The fixed-density assumption means the method is effectively estimating stiffness relative to an assumed density of $\rho = 1\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$; a phantom test that holds thickness and stiffness fixed while varying density would reveal how much accuracy depends on that prior.
  • The same dispersion-matching pipeline could be adapted to multi-layer, viscoelastic, or anisotropic tissue models by replacing the forward solver, but the paper's evidence supports only the single uniform layer case.
  • The characteristic-number analysis implies a simple smartphone-feasibility check before building hardware: compare the camera's frames-per-second and pixels-per-meter against the required dimensionless groups of the target tissue, since matching those groups, not raw resolution alone, is what preserves performance.
  • Because the method needs only surface wave video and no contact sensors, a fixed camera could in principle track muscle stiffness changes during gestures, a direct extension toward human-computer interaction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Visual Surface Wave Elastography (VSWE), a video-based method for estimating the thickness and stiffness of a soft tissue layer over a stiff base. The pipeline extracts sub-pixel surface motion with phase-based processing, forms an observed dispersion relation by two-dimensional FFT of the motion field, and fits (T, E) by maximizing SSIM between the observed dispersion image and dispersion curves computed from an FEM eigenproblem. The method is validated on COMSOL plane-strain simulations, on real gelatin phantoms with caliper and rheometry ground truth, and on a full three-dimensional anatomical leg simulation. The paper also includes ablation studies of the objective function and mesh resolution, plus a characteristic-number analysis for transferring the method to other parameter regimes.

Significance. If the real-data stiffness validation is placed on a firmer footing, this is a valuable contribution. The central inversion is genuinely physics-based and not circular: the dispersion relation is measured from video independently of the fitted parameters, and the forward model is derived from elasticity rather than learned from the data. The thickness validation on real phantoms is convincing, with VSWE estimates tracking caliper-based confidence intervals across three thicknesses and a temperature scan. The three-dimensional leg simulation is a useful model-mismatch test, and the characteristic-number discussion provides practical guidance for scaling the method. The principal weakness is that the headline 'strong agreement with ground-truth measurements' rests on a stiffness comparison whose frequency bands do not match.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 5.3, Fig. 8] The claimed 1.2% agreement between VSWE stiffness estimates and rheometry ground truth is not yet established. The rheometry measurements were made at 10-100 Hz while the excitation signal spans 40-200 Hz, and the forward model assumes a single frequency-independent modulus E. In a viscoelastic hydrogel the modulus can depend on frequency, as the paper itself notes via Ref. [48], so the VSWE estimate is an effective modulus over the excitation band and can differ from the rheometry value for reasons unrelated to inversion accuracy. In addition, the phrase 'within 1.2% error of the rheometry range' is ambiguous: it is not clear whether the comparison is made against the range of rheometry values or against individual rheometry measurements. Please state the exact comparison protocol, report rheometry data at overlapping frequencies if available (e.g., 40-100 Hz), and quantify the resulting VSWE accuracy. Until then, the abstract's 'strong agreement with ground-truth measurements' overstates what is demonstrated for stiffness.
  2. [Sec. 5.3, Fig. 8] The simulated 3D leg experiment is presented only qualitatively for stiffness ('we also recovered the constant stiffness throughout the calf'), and the thickness comparison is described as 'roughly agrees' without numerical error. Since this experiment is the main test of robustness to model mismatch (curved surface, nonuniform thickness, full 3D physics), please report quantitative errors for both inferred T and E against the known simulation ground truth, for each observation window. Without such numbers, the strength of the model-mismatch validation cannot be assessed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2 and Appendix B] The Gaussian kernel width σ in Eq. (7) is a free parameter that shapes the SSIM objective, but its value and sensitivity are never reported. Please state the value used and show that the inferred parameters are stable over a reasonable range of σ.
  2. [Sec. 5.1] The sensitivity experiment is under-specified: '5 distinct thicknesses and 4 distinct moduli' is followed by '9 clusters with 9 simulated samples each,' but the organization of clusters and the assignment of ±5% and ±10% perturbations are not defined. Please clarify the design and report a quantitative error metric (e.g., mean absolute percentage error) in addition to Fig. 5.
  3. [Sec. 4.1.2, Eq. (4)] The row-wise averaging mixes horizontal and vertical displacement magnitudes; please clarify whether the two components are normalized before averaging and whether image-space pixel units affect the observed dispersion relation.
  4. [Appendix A] The appendix ends with an incomplete sentence ('The compu'), which appears to be a truncated passage; please complete or remove it. There are also typos elsewhere, such as 'characterizaton' in Sec. 2.2 and 'VSWT' at the start of Appendix A, which should be corrected.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity in the main derivation; only a minor self-consistency in the simulated-data validation.

  1. other [Sec. 5.1 (Simulated plane strain) and Sec. 3.2 (Assumptions for tissue characterization)]
    "We created a two-layer tissue model in COMSOL [1] that would allow us to simulate samples with ground-truth geometric and mechanical parameters."

    The COMSOL synthetic observations are generated from the same two-layer linear-elastic layer-on-rigid-base model that the VSWE inversion assumes (Eq. 1 with Bloch-Floquet boundary conditions and the Sec. 3.2 assumptions). Recovering T and E from these simulated signals therefore demonstrates numerical self-consistency of the forward FEM, FFT extraction, and SSIM optimization, but it is not an independent physical validation of the model. The real-gelatin validation is external, so this does not make the central inversion circular.

full rationale

The central inference chain is not circular: Dobs is extracted from video via phase-based motion and a 2D FFT (Eq. 4), independent of the target parameters, and D(T,E) is computed from the elastic wave equation (Eq. 1) with Bloch-Floquet boundary conditions under stated assumptions; the optimization (Eq. 5) selects the parameters whose predicted dispersion matches the observed one, so the estimate is not defined in terms of the data in a way that forces agreement. No self-citation is load-bearing: Visual Vibration Tomography [17] is related work only, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior papers. The only mild circular aspect is the simulated validation in Secs. 5.1/5.3, where the 'ground truth' comes from the same model family used in inversion; this is a consistency check rather than an independent test. Real-data validation uses calipers and rheometry, and the paper explicitly acknowledges the rheometry/excitation frequency mismatch (10-100 Hz vs. 40-200 Hz) and hydrogel frequency dependence (Sec. 5.2, Fig. 7b), which is a correctness caveat on the 1.2% stiffness claim but not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method's forward model is standard linear elastodynamics with Bloch-Floquet boundary conditions. The load-bearing assumptions are the uniform two-layer tissue model and the known values of density and Poisson's ratio; if these fail, the inferred thickness and stiffness are biased. The main unstated free choices are the Gaussian kernel width sigma and the grid search discretization, neither of which is reported.

free parameters (3)
  • Gaussian kernel width sigma = not specified
    Used in Eq. (7) to render the hypothesized dispersion curves as images. The paper does not report the value or the sensitivity of results to it, and it controls the effective width of the simulated curves in the SSIM comparison.
  • Grid search ranges and step sizes for T and E = not specified
    The paper states a grid search is used for Eq. (5) but does not provide the grid bounds or resolution, so the reported accuracy could depend on the chosen grid.
  • SSIM window and internal constants = not specified
    SSIM has parameters such as window size and stability constants; the paper cites the standard implementation but does not specify which settings were used for matching dispersion images.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Bloch-Floquet phase-shifted periodic boundary conditions (Eq. 2)
    Standard method for computing dispersion in periodic cells; used to reduce the infinite medium to a 1D wavenumber problem.
  • domain assumption Linear isotropic elasticity (Eq. 1)
    Biological tissues are often viscoelastic, nonlinear, and anisotropic; the linear elastic model is an approximation that may not hold at large strains or high frequencies.
  • domain assumption Two-layer tissue model: uniform soft layer over motionless rigid bone (Sec. 3.2)
    Real tissue layers vary in thickness, stiffness, and curvature; the assumption is load-bearing for the physics forward model.
  • domain assumption Known density rho=1 g/cm^3 and Poisson's ratio nu=0.45 (Sec. 3.2)
    Values taken from prior literature; if the actual tissue differs, the inferred E and T are biased.
  • domain assumption Plane-strain 2D approximation (Sec. 5.1)
    Used for the simulated sensitivity study and likely for the fitted dispersion model; ignores 3D geometric effects and out-of-plane wave components.
  • domain assumption Horizontal wave propagation in image space (Sec. 4.1.2)
    The FFT is taken along image rows; for curved surfaces or oblique camera views, wave direction does not align with rows, which can blur the observed dispersion relation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Visual Surface Wave Elastography: Revealing Subsurface Physical Properties via Visible Surface Waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4AI3LSP

@misc{pith2026250709207,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Visual Surface Wave Elastography: Revealing Subsurface Physical Properties via Visible Surface Waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4AI3LSP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09207}
}
read the original abstract

Wave propagation on the surface of a material contains information about physical properties beneath its surface. We propose a method for inferring the thickness and stiffness of a structure from just a video of waves on its surface. Our method works by extracting a dispersion relation from the video and then solving a physics-based optimization problem to find the best-fitting thickness and stiffness parameters. We validate our method on both simulated and real data, in both cases showing strong agreement with ground-truth measurements. Our technique provides a proof-of-concept for at-home health monitoring of medically-informative tissue properties, and it is further applicable to fields such as human-computer interaction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09207 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Estimating subsurface tissue properties of a human leg [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The dispersion relation depends on both the thickness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Method overview. Given a video of the surface of the medium of interest, we first extract motion fields in image-space. From [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Obtaining a dispersion relation from image-space motion. Here we demonstrate with the vertical displacements taken from a real [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Experiment setup. A shaker was applied on one side [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Estimated thickness and stiffness for three phan￾toms over a range of temperatures. The phantoms were pro￾duced with three different volumes (1000, 1100, 1500 mL) of gelatin but set in the same-sized container, thus generating three different thicknesses. The thick…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: 3D anatomical inference. Panel (a) shows the realistic 3D leg anatomy (taken from the Visible Human Project [2]). We ran a full 3D simulation of the leg’s response to a chirp excitation applied on the skin. The observed dispersion relation, along with the optimization …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Ablation of optimization objective function. The opti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Ablation of spatial extent of observation. Keeping all [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Leveraging similitude of characteristic numbers en [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Learning to See Inside Opaque Liquid Containers using Speckle Vibrometry

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A speckle-vibrometry rig with a transformer can remotely classify the liquid level inside opaque containers from surface vibrations excited by sound.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [48]

    Measurement of the elasticity modulus of soft tissues

    S Z ¨orner, M Kaltenbacher, R Lerch, A Sutor, and M D¨ollinger. Measurement of the elasticity modulus of soft tissues. Journal of Biomechanics, 43(8):1540–1545, 2010. 6 10 A. Runtime analysis The primary computational cost of VSWT stems from cal- culating dispersion relations to fit observed data. To address this efficiently, we precomputed dispersion rel...

    work page 2010

  2. [1]

    Comsol multiphysics® v5.5, 2019

    COMSOL AB. Comsol multiphysics® v5.5, 2019. 4

    work page 2019

  3. [2]

    Ackerman

    M.J. Ackerman. The visible human project. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(3):504–511, 1998. 6, 7

    work page 1998

  4. [3]

    Three dimensional lower extremity musculoskeletal geometry of the visible human female and male

    Thor E Andreassen, Donald R Hume, Landon D Hamilton, Karen E Walker, Sean E Higinbotham, and Kevin B Shel- burne. Three dimensional lower extremity musculoskeletal geometry of the visible human female and male. Scientific Data, 10(1):34, 2023. 6

    work page 2023

  5. [4]

    J. W. Andrews, M. J. Adams, and T. D. Montenegro-Johnson. A universal scaling law of mammalian touch. Science Ad- vances, 6(41):eabb6912, 2020. 1, 3

    work page 2020

  6. [5]

    Ultrasound medical imaging techniques: a survey

    Danilo Avola, Luigi Cinque, Alessio Fagioli, Gianluca Foresti, and Alessio Mecca. Ultrasound medical imaging techniques: a survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54 (3):1–38, 2021. 2

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    R. A. Bell. Economics of MRI technology. Journal of mag- netic resonance imaging: JMRI, 6(1):10–25, 1996. 1, 2

    work page 1996

  8. [7]

    Bhat, Christopher D

    Kiran S. Bhat, Christopher D. Twigg, Jessica K. Hodgins, Pradeep K. Khosla, Zoran Popovi´c, and Steven M. Seitz. Es- timating cloth simulation parameters from video. In Pro- ceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Sym- posium on Computer Animation, page 37–51, Goslar, DEU,

    work page 2003

Show all 49 references
  1. [8]

    Marcin Białas and Bojan B. Guzina. On the viscoelastic characterization of thin tissues via surface-wave sensing. In- ternational Journal of Solids and Structures , 48(14):2209– 2217, 2011. 2

    2011

  2. [9]

    ¨Uber die quantenmechanik der elektronen in kristallgittern

    Felix Bloch. ¨Uber die quantenmechanik der elektronen in kristallgittern. Zeitschrift f ¨ur physik, 52(7):555–600, 1929. 3

    1929

  3. [10]

    Estimating the material properties of fabric from video

    Katherine L Bouman, Bei Xiao, Peter Battaglia, and William T Freeman. Estimating the material properties of fabric from video. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 1984–1991, Sydney, Australia, 2013. IEEE. 2

    1984

  4. [11]

    Economics of mus- culoskeletal ultrasound

    Nathalie J Bureau and Daniela Ziegler. Economics of mus- culoskeletal ultrasound. Current radiology reports , 4:1–7,

  5. [12]

    Sound localization from motion: Jointly learning sound direction and camera rotation

    Ziyang Chen, Shengyi Qian, and Andrew Owens. Sound localization from motion: Jointly learning sound direction and camera rotation. International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023. 2

    2023

  6. [13]

    Abe Davis, Michael Rubinstein, Neal Wadhwa, Gautham Mysore, Fredo Durand, and William T. Freeman. The visual microphone: Passive recovery of sound from video. ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proc. SIGGRAPH) , 33(4):79:1– 79:10, 2014. 2

    2014

  7. [14]

    Vi- sual vibrometry: Estimating material properties from small motion in video

    Abe Davis, Katherine L Bouman, Justin G Chen, Michael Rubinstein, Fredo Durand, and William T Freeman. Vi- sual vibrometry: Estimating material properties from small motion in video. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 5335–...

    2015

  8. [15]

    Bouman, Justin G

    Abe Davis, Katherine L. Bouman, Justin G. Chen, Michael Rubinstein, Oral B ¨uy¨uk¨ozt¨urk, Fr ´edo Durand, and William T. Freeman. Visual vibrometry: Estimating material properties from small motions in video. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 39(4):732–745, 2017. 2

    2017

  9. [16]

    Soft tissue elastometer

    V Egorov, S Tsyuryupa, S Kanilo, M Kogit, and AJME Sar- vazyan. Soft tissue elastometer. Medical engineering & physics, 30(2):206–212, 2008. 4

    2008

  10. [17]

    Visual vibration tomography: Esti- mating interior material properties from monocular video

    Berthy T Feng, Alexander C Ogren, Chiara Daraio, and Katherine L Bouman. Visual vibration tomography: Esti- mating interior material properties from monocular video. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 16231–16240, 2022. 2

    2022

  11. [18]

    Self- supervised video forensics by audio-visual anomaly detec- tion

    Chao Feng, Ziyang Chen, and Andrew Owens. Self- supervised video forensics by audio-visual anomaly detec- tion. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) ,

  12. [19]

    Computation of compo- nent image velocity from local phase information

    David J Fleet and Allan D Jepson. Computation of compo- nent image velocity from local phase information. Interna- tional journal of computer vision, 5(1):77–104, 1990. 3

    1990

  13. [20]

    Sur les ´equations diff´erentielles lin´eaires `a coefficients p´eriodiques

    Gaston Floquet. Sur les ´equations diff´erentielles lin´eaires `a coefficients p´eriodiques. In Annales scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole normale sup´erieure, pages 47–88, 1883. 3

  14. [21]

    Layer thick- ness prediction and tissue classification in two-layered tissue structures using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy

    Freija Geldof, Behdad Dashtbozorg, Benno HW Hendriks, Henricus JCM Sterenborg, and Theo JM Ruers. Layer thick- ness prediction and tissue classification in two-layered tissue structures using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy. Scientific reports, 12(1):1698, 2022. 1, 3

    2022

  15. [22]

    Georges, Jia-Ji Hui, Zoltan Gombos, Mar- garet E

    Penelope C. Georges, Jia-Ji Hui, Zoltan Gombos, Mar- garet E. McCormick, Andrew Y . Wang, Masayuki Uemura, Rosemarie Mick, Paul A. Janmey, Emma E. Furth, and Re- becca G. Wells. Increased stiffness of the rat liver pre- cedes matrix deposition: Implications for fibrosis. Ameri...

    2007

  16. [23]

    Gucunski and R

    N. Gucunski and R. D. Woods. Numerical simulation of the SASW test. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 11 (4):213–227, 1992. 2

    1992

  17. [24]

    MRI: the basics: The Basics

    Ray Hashman Hashemi, William G Bradley, and Christo- pher J Lisanti. MRI: the basics: The Basics . Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2012. 2

    2012

  18. [25]

    Tissue elas- ticity properties as biomarkers for prostate cancer

    Kenneth Hoyt, Benjamin Castaneda, Man Zhang, Priya Nig- wekar, P Anthony di Sant’Agnese, Jean V Joseph, John Strang, Deborah J Rubens, and Kevin J Parker. Tissue elas- ticity properties as biomarkers for prostate cancer. Cancer Biomarkers, 4(4-5):213–225, 2008. 1

    2008

  19. [26]

    Emerg- ing wearable ultrasound technology

    Hao Huang, Ray S Wu, Muyang Lin, and Sheng Xu. Emerg- ing wearable ultrasound technology. IEEE Transactions on 9 Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control , 71(7): 713–729, 2023. 2

    2023

  20. [27]

    Quantifying cell- generated forces: Poisson’s ratio matters

    Yousef Javanmardi, Huw Colin-York, Nicolas Szita, Marco Fritzsche, and Emad Moeendarbary. Quantifying cell- generated forces: Poisson’s ratio matters. Communications physics, 4(1):237, 2021. 3

    2021

  21. [28]

    Ultrasonic non-destructive evaluation of compos- ites: A review

    Jitesh Jodhani, Abhay Handa, Anandita Gautam, Ramakant Rana, et al. Ultrasonic non-destructive evaluation of compos- ites: A review. Materials Today: Proceedings, 78:627–632,

  22. [29]

    Comparison of Cancer Cell Elasticity by Cell Type

    Sangwoo Kwon, Woochul Yang, Donggerami Moon, and Kyung Sook Kim. Comparison of Cancer Cell Elasticity by Cell Type. Journal of Cancer, 11(18):5403–5412, 2020. 1

    2020

  23. [30]

    Non-invasive assessment of muscle stiffness in pa- tients with duchenne muscular dystrophy

    Lilian Lacourpaille, Franc ¸ois Hug, Arnaud Gu ´evel, Yann P´er´eon, Armelle Magot, Jean-Yves Hogrel, and Antoine Nordez. Non-invasive assessment of muscle stiffness in pa- tients with duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle & Nerve, 51(2):284–286, 2015. 1

    2015

  24. [31]

    Dis- persion analysis of surface wave testing – SASW vs

    Chih-Ping Lin, Chun-Hung Lin, and Chih-Jung Chien. Dis- persion analysis of surface wave testing – SASW vs. MASW. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 143:223–230, 2017. 2

    2017

  25. [32]

    Mariappan, Kevin J

    Yogesh K. Mariappan, Kevin J. Glaser, and Richard L. Ehman. Magnetic resonance elastography: A review. Clini- cal Anatomy, 23(5):497–511, 2010. 1, 2

    2010

  26. [33]

    Data-driven estimation of cloth simula- tion models

    Eder Miguel, Derek Bradley, Bernhard Thomaszewski, Bernd Bickel, Wojciech Matusik, Miguel A Otaduy, and Steve Marschner. Data-driven estimation of cloth simula- tion models. In Computer Graphics Forum, pages 519–528, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012. Wiley Online Library, Wiley On- line...

    2012

  27. [34]

    Soheil Nazarian and Kenneth Stokoe. Evaluation of Mod- uli and Thicknesses of Pavement Systems by Spectral- Analysis-of-Surface-Waves Method.The Study of New Tech- nologies for Pavement Evaluation Research Project 3-8-80- 256, as conducted for Texas State Department of Highway...

  28. [35]

    MASW for geotechnical site investigation

    Choon Park. MASW for geotechnical site investigation. The Leading Edge, 32(6):656–662, 2013. 2

    2013

  29. [36]

    Babette S. Zemel. Chapter 18 - body composition during growth and development. In Human Growth and Devel- opment (Second Edition) , pages 461–486. Academic Press, Boston, second edition edition, 2012. 3

    2012

  30. [37]

    Shapiro, Michel Campillo, Laurent Stehly, and Michael H

    Nikolai M. Shapiro, Michel Campillo, Laurent Stehly, and Michael H. Ritzwoller. High-Resolution Surface-Wave To- mography from Ambient Seismic Noise. Science, 307 (5715):1615–1618, 2005. 2

    2005

  31. [38]

    The steerable pyramid: A flexible architecture for multi-scale derivative computation

    Eero P Simoncelli and William T Freeman. The steerable pyramid: A flexible architecture for multi-scale derivative computation. In Proceedings., International Conference on Image Processing, pages 444–447, Washington, D.C., USA,

  32. [39]

    Cotler, and Michael Cho

    Shan Sun, Zhenyuan Song, Scott J. Cotler, and Michael Cho. Biomechanics and functionality of hepatocytes in liver cir- rhosis. Journal of Biomechanics , 47(9):2205–2210, 2014. 1

    2014

  33. [40]

    Taljanovic, Lana H

    Mihra S. Taljanovic, Lana H. Gimber, Giles W. Becker, L. Daniel Latt, Andrea S. Klauser, David M. Melville, Liang Gao, and Russell S. Witte. Shear-Wave Elastography: Basic Physics and Musculoskeletal Applications. RadioGraphics, 37(3):855–870, 2017. 1, 2

    2017

  34. [41]

    N. H. Varady and A. J. Grodzinsky. Osteoarthritis year in review 2015: Mechanics. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage , 24 (1):27–35, 2016. 1

    2015

  35. [42]

    Virgilio, Kyle S

    Kelley M. Virgilio, Kyle S. Martin, Shayn M. Peirce, and Silvia S. Blemker. Multiscale models of skeletal muscle reveal the complex effects of muscular dystrophy on tissue mechanics and damage susceptibility. Interface Focus, 5(2): 20140080, 2015. 1

    2015

  36. [43]

    Phase-based video motion processing

    Neal Wadhwa, Michael Rubinstein, Fr ´edo Durand, and William T Freeman. Phase-based video motion processing. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 32(4):1–10, 2013. 3

    2013

  37. [44]

    Botanical materi- als based on biomechanics

    Bohan Wang, Yili Zhao, and Jernej Barbiˇc. Botanical materi- als based on biomechanics. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 36(4):1–13, 2017. 2

    2017

  38. [45]

    Bovik, H.R

    Zhou Wang, A.C. Bovik, H.R. Sheikh, and E.P. Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , 13(4): 600–612, 2004. 4, 11

    2004

  39. [46]

    Introduction to oceanography

    Paul Webb. Introduction to oceanography. Roger Williams University, 2021. 1

    2021

  40. [47]

    Tran- sient elastography

    Vincent Wai-Sun Wong and Henry Lik-Yuen Chan. Tran- sient elastography. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepa- tology, 25(11):1726–1731, 2010. 1, 2

    2010

  41. [2003]

    Eurographics Association. 2

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.