Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 64 references

Feasibility of spectral-element modeling of wave propagation through the anatomy of marine mammals

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 This paper shows that the spectral-element method can simulate 3D ultrasonic wave propagation through a bottlenose dolphin head, making high-frequency bioacoustic modeling scalable.

desk verdict Genuine first for 3D spectral-element modeling of a marine mammal head, with a practical meshing workflow, but the numerical validation is too thin to support the quantitative claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.22944 v1 pith:ZMGNPTTI submitted 2025-06-28 cs.CE cs.SDeess.ASq-bio.TO

Carlos García A. , Vladimiro Boselli , Aida Hejazi Nooghabi , Andrea Colombi , Lapo Boschi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CEcs.SDeess.ASq-bio.TO
keywords spectralelementmethoddolphinbioacousticsultrasonicwavepropagationhexahedralmeshSPECFEM3DCTsegmentationTursiopstruncatusmarinemammalhearing
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 claims that the spectral-element method (SEM) can practically simulate 3D ultrasonic wave propagation through the complex anatomy of a marine mammal head, specifically a bottlenose dolphin. Using CT scans, the authors build a hexahedral mesh of a dolphin head with four tissue types, then run two SPECFEM3D simulations: an incoming plane wave at 40 kHz and a point source near the phonic lips. They argue SEM avoids the costly linear-system inversions that limit finite-element methods and converges exponentially, making high-frequency time-domain bioacoustics simulations feasible. The value of the claim is that it opens a scalable computational path to test hypotheses about echolocation, hearing, and noise pollution in marine mammals.

What carries the argument

The spectral-element method itself: a high-order finite-element formulation using Gauss-Legendre-Lobatto points, whose global mass matrix is diagonal by construction, enabling explicit, matrix-inversion-free time stepping. The authors use SPECFEM3D, which couples acoustic (fluid) and elastic (solid) wave equations at interfaces. The mesh is generated with the SCULPT tool from a conformal, boolean-fragmented geometry, using adaptive hexahedral cells down to 0.1 mm at complex features. The machinery also includes the CT-to-STL-to-CUBIT pipeline with per-tissue homogeneous material parameters derived from Hounsfield units.

What would settle it

If a 120 kHz simulation that adds air-filled nasal passages, teeth, and tissue gradients produces wavefields at the tympano-periotic complex that differ from the simplified model by more than the model's numerical noise level, then the feasibility claim for real echolocation conditions would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that SEM, implemented through SPECFEM3D, can successfully simulate 3D time-domain wave propagation through a real bottlenose dolphin head built from CT data. The authors demonstrate this with a 16-million-element hexahedral mesh with adaptive refinement at jaws and acoustic fats, a plane-wave simulation recorded near the tympano-periotic complex, and a point-source simulation of an outgoing click-like signal through the melon. They validate the numerical solver with a reciprocity test whose mismatch is 40 dB below signal level, and they show the mesh quality is acceptable (average scaled Jacobian 0.93). This is presented as the first use of SEM for marine mammal bioacoustics, and as a feasible alternative to 3D FEM models.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the assumption that a CT-derived, manually segmented head with homogeneous per-tissue acoustic properties and no internal air spaces is realistic enough that simulated wave propagation represents real dolphin anatomy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If SEM proves feasible, 3D time-domain simulations of dolphin biosonar at realistic click frequencies (around 120 kHz) become tractable on HPC clusters, where the authors estimate runs could complete in minutes with GPU acceleration.
  • The same pipeline can be applied to other marine mammal species and to other anatomical regions, enabling comparative studies of sound reception and emission.
  • The approach provides a numerical testbed for hypotheses about the roles of the melon, jaws, acoustic fats, and skull in beam formation and hearing, complementing existing 2D and FEM studies.
  • With future inclusion of air spaces, attenuation, and tissue gradients, the model can be used to study anthropogenic noise impacts on marine mammals.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's feasibility claim is conditional on the simplified anatomy; a natural extension would be to quantify how much the omitted air sacs and teeth change TPC wavefields at 120 kHz, which would test whether the simplified model suffices for echolocation studies.
  • The reciprocity validation suggests numerical error is low, but the lack of physical validation means the next decisive experiments are comparisons against measured sound fields in dolphin heads (e.g., in vitro hydrophone measurements).
  • The same SEM pipeline could be transferred to medical ultrasound applications such as transcranial focused ultrasound, where similar hexahedral meshing challenges arise, though that is beyond the paper's scope.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports the first 3D spectral-element (SEM) simulation of time-domain ultrasonic wave propagation in a CT-derived bottlenose dolphin head. The authors build a hexahedral mesh from segmented CT data using 3D Slicer, Blender, MeshLab, FreeCAD, and Coreform CUBIT/SCULPT, assign homogeneous acoustic properties to four tissue classes plus water, and run two SPECFEM3D simulations: a 40 kHz plane wave incident on the head and a point source near the phonic lips. Signals are recorded near the left and right tympano-periotic complexes, and a reciprocity test is used as numerical validation. The paper concludes that SEM is feasible and scalable for marine mammal bioacoustics, with detailed meshing commands provided for reproducibility.

Significance. If the numerical results are trustworthy, this is a useful and timely contribution: it is the first application of SEM to marine mammal head acoustics, it uses an open-source and reproducible software stack, and it demonstrates the complete pipeline from CT segmentation to high-performance time-domain wavefield simulation. The authors are appropriately transparent about anatomical simplifications, and the forward model uses no fitted parameters. The main reservation is that the only quantitative validation, a reciprocity check, is a symmetry test rather than a convergence test; the significance of the 'feasibility' claim therefore depends on whether the authors can demonstrate that the discrete solution is accurate, for example via h/p-refinement or comparison with an independent solver.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.6, §4, §5] The reciprocity test in §3.6 is a symmetry property of the discretized operator and does not certify that the computed wavefields are accurate solutions of the continuous equations; a severely under-resolved mesh can satisfy reciprocity to machine precision while producing wrong amplitudes and phases. This matters because the central claim of the paper ('successfully simulate 3D wave propagation') rests on the numerical trustworthiness of the TPC signals in §4. The minimum scaled Jacobian of 0.0028 reported in Table 1 is far below the threshold of 0.2 cited from the CUBIT documentation, and the run uses N_GLL=3 with no h- or p-refinement study. I recommend adding a convergence test—for example a mesh-coarsening/refinement sequence or a comparison against an analytical solution in a simplified geometry (homogeneous sphere/cylinder) and, if feasible, against k-Wave or COMSOL on the same anatomical model—and reporting how the TPC signals change under refinement.
  2. [§3.4, §5] The simulations are run at f0=40 kHz with three GLL points per element, while the motivating dolphin-click applications are at roughly 120 kHz. The statement in §5 that the 2.5 mm mesh supports up to 200 kHz using three points per wavelength is an extrapolation, not a demonstrated result; at high impedance contrasts and complex interfaces, three points per wavelength is likely to be insufficient for phase-accurate transmission and reflection. To support the claimed scalability to full-bandwidth biosonar frequencies, the authors should either run at least one higher-frequency case (with a corresponding resolution analysis) or explicitly limit the feasibility claim to the demonstrated frequency range.
  3. [Abstract, §5] The abstract and Section 5 state that SEM can successfully simulate wave propagation through a bottlenose dolphin head, but the model omits internal air spaces, teeth, attenuation, and tissue-property gradients, as acknowledged in §5. Air spaces in particular are known to be acoustically important (e.g., near the phonic lips and nasal passages), and their omission may change the wavefield substantially. Since these omissions are intentional and documented, the manuscript should qualify its central claim to 'a simplified CT-derived head model' rather than the anatomy of a dolphin head, or it should justify why these features are not needed for the feasibility conclusion.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.6, Fig. 6] The text says the difference is 'four orders of magnitude (i.e. 40 dB)'; if the plotted quantity is particle velocity (an amplitude), a factor of 10^4 corresponds to 80 dB, not 40 dB. Please correct and specify whether the comparison is made on amplitude or power.
  2. [§3.2] The description of the 1-mm shift to avoid coplanar faces is a bit unclear: after subtraction, how is the remaining 1-mm section removed and does this alter the head-water interface? Please clarify.
  3. [Keywords] The keyword 'SPECEFM3D' contains a typo and should be 'SPECFEM3D'.
  4. [§3.4, Fig. 5] Please specify how the 'plane wave' is generated: the text says multiple point sources fired simultaneously, but the source-time function and amplitude tapering near the boundaries should be given as a formula or a reference; currently the reader cannot reproduce the source.
  5. [Table 3] The SCULPT command table is useful, but a few entries are not self-explanatory (e.g., thicken_material, adapt_material); a short explanation or pointer to CUBIT documentation would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: forward SEM simulation with no fitted parameters; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that SPECFEM3D, an externally validated spectral-element code, can produce time-domain 3D wavefields through a CT-derived hexahedral mesh of a dolphin head. The material properties in Table 2 are assigned from Hounsfield-unit tissue classification and literature values, not inverted or tuned to match any simulated output; the paper reports no parameter fitting. The only self-citation that enters the results is the qualitative statement that the recorded TPC signals are consistent with the qualitative findings of Hejazi Nooghabi et al. [5], made in Section 4.1; this comparison is illustrative and not load-bearing for the feasibility claim, and the forward simulation would stand independently without it. The reciprocity test in Section 3.6 checks a symmetry that the discretized operator should satisfy; it is a weak accuracy check, but it is not a step that defines the output in terms of the input. The acknowledged omissions of air spaces, teeth, attenuation, and tissue gradients are modeling limitations, not circularity. No quoted equation or parameter is equivalent by construction to the claimed demonstration, so no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy and stability of SPECFEM3D, the clinical realism of the CT-derived model, and the adequacy of the simplified tissue properties; none of these are independently verified in the paper.

free parameters (1)
  • Per-tissue homogeneous acoustic properties (density, vp, vs) = soft tissue: 1013/1536/215; acoustic fat: 928/1390/186; melon: 884/1316/184; bone: 2035/3400/1817; water: 1028/1480/0…
    Assigned as single averaged values per segment from CT HU thresholds (Sec. 3.5); the authors acknowledge that spatially varying properties could affect wave focusing.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SPECFEM3D correctly solves the coupled acoustic-elastic wave equation for this hexahedral mesh.
    The paper relies on SPECFEM3D's correctness rather than validating it against an independent solver (Sec. 2, Sec. 3.4).
  • domain assumption Homogeneous, isotropic material properties per tissue type are adequate for the feasibility claim.
    Table 2 assigns single density and velocities per tissue; the authors note in Sec. 5 that tissue gradients could significantly affect focusing and defocusing.
  • domain assumption Omitted features (teeth, air sacs, ducts, attenuation) do not change the feasibility conclusion for SEM.
    Sec. 5 lists these omissions and suggests air spaces may strongly affect reverberation near the source.
  • standard math The reciprocity theorem provides a valid numerical error estimate.
    Sec. 3.6 applies the reciprocity theorem (Eq. 6) to quantify numerical noise; this is a standard result.
  • domain assumption CT Hounsfield unit thresholds correctly classify tissue types.
    Sec. 3.1 uses manual thresholding to segment bone, acoustic fat, melon, and soft tissue; the accuracy of this segmentation is not independently verified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Feasibility of spectral-element modeling of wave propagation through the anatomy of marine mammals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZMGNPTTI

@misc{pith2026250622944,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Feasibility of spectral-element modeling of wave propagation through the anatomy of marine mammals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZMGNPTTI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.22944}
}
read the original abstract

This study introduces the first 3D spectral-element method (SEM) simulation of ultrasonic wave propagation in a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) head. Unlike traditional finite-element methods (FEM), which struggle with high-frequency simulations due to costly linear-system inversions and slower convergence, SEM offers exponential convergence and efficient parallel computation. Using Computed Tomography (CT) scan data, we developed a detailed hexahedral mesh capturing complex anatomical features, such as acoustic fats and jaws. Our simulations of plane and spherical waves confirm SEM's effectiveness for ultrasonic time-domain modeling. This approach opens new avenues for marine biology, contributing to research in echolocation, the impacts of anthropogenic marine noise pollution and the biophysics of hearing and click generation in marine mammals. By overcoming FEM's limitations, SEM provides a powerful scalable tool to test hypotheses about dolphin bioacoustics, with significant implications for conservation and understanding marine mammal auditory systems under increasing environmental challenges.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.22944 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Workflow. Software packages used at each step are specified in small fonts in the corresponding block. where 𝐮(𝐱, 𝑡) = 𝜌 −1∇𝜑 denotes the displacement of a moving particle, 𝜌 the volumetric density, 𝐌𝑎;𝑒 the mass matrix, 𝐊𝑎;𝑒 the stiffness matrix, 𝐂𝑎;𝑒 the coupling matrix and 𝐅𝑎;𝑒 is the source term expressed in the right-hand side of Eq. (2). The attractiveness of the SEM is that the global mass matrix is diagonal … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Segmentation in 3D SLICER. (a) Original skull before segmentation. Melon and skin boundary after segmentation. Bones were segmented independently and subsequently merged. (b) The frontal (left), side (centre) and bottom (right) views illustrate the segmentation processes for the skin (thin orange lines) and the melon (purple area). The Tympano-Periotic Complex (TPC) is visible, although the CT scan quality is not su… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Model geometry. (a) Complete model: the shaded box corresponds to the volume of water surrounding the dolphin head. Other anatomical features depicted are: the melon (green), skull (orange), lower jaws (light blue) and acoustic fats (light yellow). (b) Skull and melon geometry. (c) Side view: melon, jaws and acoustic fats, slightly transparent (top) and opaque (bottom). (d) Top view: jaws and acoustic fats (slightly… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a) Transparent view of the mesh. A clipping plane along the median 𝑦𝑧-plane at 𝑥 = 0 was applied to reveal its internal structure. b) Details of the skull and melon. Most of the interior elements are cuboids with their external faces conforming to the interface geometr…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: a) Source signal with 4-cycles at 40 kHz. The waveform has been windowed with a Tukey window of length 0.1 ms. b) Spectrum of the signal. The bandwidth of the first zeros (below 30 kHz and above 50 kHz) correspond to length of the window. c) Tapered wave profile. The a…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Reciprocity Theorem. Location of the sources for the test, shown on a slice of the head mesh along the 𝑦𝑧-plane at 𝑥 = 0. b) Comparison of recorded signals. The recorded signal S1 fired from 𝒓1 is “equal” to the recorded signal S2 fired form 𝒓2 . c) Absolute difference…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A slice along the 𝑦𝑧 plane at 𝑥 = 0 is shown depicting the wavefront propagating in the fluid domain towards the dolphin head and through its different tissues at different times 𝑡. The colorbar scale show the amplitude of the 𝑧 component of the particle velocity 𝑣𝑧 . …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Recorded signals near the Tympano-Periotic Complex (TPC), at both left (L, depicted in gray thick lines) and right (R, in violet thin lines) ears. a) Pressure, b) Pressure spectrum. c) Each component of the particle velocity. The 𝑣𝑧 component consists mainly of the dir…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Outgoing click propagation. The color scale is defined so as to be able to visualize the relative-low amplitude compressional wave propagating through water. This results in the saturation of vibration amplitude, within the head, in the immediate vicinity of the source…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Grimal, B

    Q. Grimal, B. A. Gama, S. Naili, A. Watzky, J. W. Gillespie, Finite element study of high-speed blunt impact on thorax: Linear elastic considerations, International Journal of Impact Engineering 30 (2004) 665–683. doi:10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.08.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.08.002 2004

  2. [2]

    doi:10.1121/1.4932166

    E.van’tWout,P.Gélat,T.Betcke,S.Arridge, Afastboundaryelementmethodforthescatteringanalysisofhigh-intensityfocusedultrasound, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 138 (2015) 2726–2737. doi:10.1121/1.4932166. C. García A.et al.: Preprint Page 13 of 15 Feasibility of spectral-element modeling of wave propagation through the anatomy of marine mammals

    doi:10.1121/1.4932166 2015

  3. [3]

    J. Gu, Y. Jing, Modeling of wave propagation for medical ultrasound: A review, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 62 (2015) 1979–1992. doi:10.1109/TUFFC.2015.007034

    work page arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    Bachmann, J

    E. Bachmann, J. Tromp, Source encoding for viscoacoustic ultrasound computed tomographya), The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 147 (2020) 3221–3235. doi:10.1121/10.0001191

    work page doi:10.1121/10.0001191 2020

  5. [5]

    5 (2021) 3

    A.HejaziNooghabi,Q.Grimal,A.Herrel,M.Reinwald,L.Boschi, Contributionofbone-reverberatedwavestosoundlocalizationofdolphins: A numerical model, Acta Acust. 5 (2021) 3. doi:10.1051/aacus/2020030

    work page arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    C. Wei, C. Erbe, A. B. Smith, W.-C. Yang, Validated 3D finite-element model of the Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) head anatomy demonstrates gular sound reception and channelling through the mandibular fats, Bioinspir. Biomim. 19 (2024) 056025. doi:10.1088/ 1748-3190/ad7344

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Castellazzi, P

    G. Castellazzi, P. Krysl, L. Rojas, T. W. Cranford, Assessment of the effect of natural and anthropogenic aquatic noise on vaquita (Phocoena sinus) through a numerical simulation, Advances in experimental medicine and biology 730 (2012). doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-7311-5_68

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-7311-5_68 2012

  8. [8]

    P. E. Nachtigall, Biosonar and Sound Localization in Dolphins, in: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, 2016. doi:10.1093/ acrefore/9780190264086.013.103

    arXiv 2016

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Kazemi, M

    A. Kazemi, M. Kesba, P. Provini, Realistic three-dimensional avian vocal tract model demonstrates how shape affects sound filtering (Passer domesticus), Journal of The Royal Society Interface 20 (2023) 20220728. doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0728

    2023

  2. [10]

    W. Feng, Y. Zhang, C. Wei, A biosonar model of finless porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides) for material composition discrimination of cylinders, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 146 (2019) 1362–1370. doi:10.1121/1.5122981

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    COMSOL Multiphysics, COMSOL Multiphysics (version 6.0) [computer program],, www.comsol.com (Last viewed Jun 25, 2025), 2024

    2025

  4. [12]

    Alnaes, J

    M. Alnaes, J. Blechta, J. Hake, A. Johansson, B. Kehlet, A. Logg, C. Richardson, J. Ring, M. E. Rognes, G. N. Wells, The FEniCS Project Version 1.5, Archive of Numerical Software 3 (2015). doi:10.11588/ans.2015.100.20553

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    Hecht, New development in freefem++, Journal of Numerical Mathematics 20 (2012) 1–14

    F. Hecht, New development in freefem++, Journal of Numerical Mathematics 20 (2012) 1–14. doi:10.1515/jnum-2012-0013

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    Arndt, W

    D. Arndt, W. Bangerth, D. Davydov, T. Heister, L. Heltai, M. Kronbichler, M. Maier, J.-P. Pelteret, B. Turcksin, D. Wells, The deal.II finite element library: Design, features, and insights, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 81 (2021) 407–422. doi:10.1016/j.camwa. 2020...

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    S. R. Haqshenas, P. Gélat, E. van ’t Wout, T. Betcke, N. Saffari, A fast full-wave solver for calculating ultrasound propagation in the body, Ultrasonics 110 (2021) 106240. doi:10.1016/j.ultras.2020.106240

    2021

  8. [16]

    doi:10.21105/joss.02879

    T.Betcke,M.W.Scroggs, Bempp-cl:AfastPythonbasedjust-in-timecompilingboundaryelementlibrary., JournalofOpenSourceSoftware 6 (2021) 2879. doi:10.21105/joss.02879

    2021 doi

  9. [17]

    M. B. Porter, H. P. Bucker, Gaussian beam tracing for computing ocean acoustic fields, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 82 (1987) 1349–1359. doi:10.1121/1.395269

    1987 doi

  10. [18]

    B. E. Treeby, J. Jaros, D. Rohrbach, B. T. Cox, Modelling elastic wave propagation using the k-Wave MATLAB Toolbox, in: 2014 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium, 2014, pp. 146–149. doi:10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0037

    2014

  11. [19]

    doi:10.1016/0021-9991(84)90128-1

    A.T.Patera, Aspectralelementmethodforfluiddynamics:Laminarflowinachannelexpansion, JournalofComputationalPhysics54(1984) 468–488. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(84)90128-1

    1984 doi

  12. [20]

    Komatitsch, J

    D. Komatitsch, J. Tromp, Introduction to the spectral element method for three-dimensional seismic wave propagation, Geophysical Journal International 139 (1999) 806–822. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246x.1999.00967.x

    1999

  13. [21]

    Komatitsch, C

    D. Komatitsch, C. Barnes, J. Tromp, Wave propagation near a fluid-solid interface: A spectral-element approach, GEOPHYSICS 65 (2000) 623–631. doi:10.1190/1.1444758

    2000 doi

  14. [22]

    4035–4039

    M.Afanasiev,C.Boehm,M.vanDriel,L.Krischer,A.Fichtner, Flexiblehigh-performancemultiphysicswaveformmodelingonunstructured spectral-element meshes, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2018, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ...

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01653.x

    D.Komatitsch,J.Tromp, Spectral-elementsimulationsofglobalseismicwavepropagation—I.Validation, GeophysicalJournalInternational 149 (2002) 390–412. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01653.x

    2002 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Komatitsch, J

    D. Komatitsch, J. Tromp, Spectral-element simulations of global seismic wave propagation—II. Three-dimensional models, oceans, rotation and self-gravitation, Geophysical Journal International 150 (2002) 303–318. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01716.x

    2002 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Marty, C

    P. Marty, C. Boehm, C. Paverd, M. Rominger, A. Fichtner, Full-waveform ultrasound modeling of soft tissue-bone interactions using conforming hexahedral meshes, in: Medical Imaging 2022: Physics of Medical Imaging, volume 12031, SPIE, 2022, pp. 877–891. doi:10.1117/12.2611548

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    Marty, C

    P. Marty, C. Boehm, A. Fichtner, Elastic Full-Waveform Inversion for Transcranial Ultrasound Computed Tomography using Optimal Transport, in: 2022 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), 2022, pp. 1–4. doi:10.1109/IUS54386.2022.9957394

    2022

  19. [27]

    Marty, C

    P. Marty, C. Boehm, M. van Driel, A. Fichtner, Transcranial ultrasound modeling using the spectral-element method, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 156 (2024) 3674–3693. doi:10.1121/10.0034474

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    Ferroni, Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Methods for the Elastodynamics Equation on Hybrid Hexahedral-Tetrahedral Grids, Ph.D

    A. Ferroni, Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Methods for the Elastodynamics Equation on Hybrid Hexahedral-Tetrahedral Grids, Ph.D. thesis, Politecnico Milano, 2017

    2017

  21. [29]

    Blacker, Meeting the Challenge for Automated Conformal Hexahedral Meshing, 2000

    T. Blacker, Meeting the Challenge for Automated Conformal Hexahedral Meshing, 2000

    2000

  22. [30]

    C. Wei, W. Au, D. Ketten, Y. Zhang, Finite element simulation of broadband biosonar signal propagation in the near- and far-field of an echolocating Atlantic bottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ), The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 143 (2018) 2611–2620. doi:1...

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    C. Wei, W. Au, D. Ketten, Modeling of the near to far acoustic fields of an echolocating bottlenose dolphin and harbor porpoise, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 147 (2020) 1790–1801. doi:10.1121/10.0000918

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    Zhang, Z

    Y. Zhang, Z. Song, X. Wang, W. Cao, W. Au, Directional Acoustic Wave Manipulation by a Porpoise via Multiphase Forehead Structure, Physical Review Applied 8 (2017). doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.064002. C. García A.et al.: Preprint Page 14 of 15 Feasibility of spectral-element ...

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    doi:10.3390/ani12243472

    C.Wei,L.G.Gill,C.Erbe,A.B.Smith,W.-C.Yang, TheDistinctiveForeheadCleftoftheRisso’sDolphin(Grampusgriseus)HardlyAffects Biosonar Beam Formation, Animals 12 (2022) 3472. doi:10.3390/ani12243472

    2022 doi

  26. [34]

    doi:10.1121/1.4941780

    C.Wei,W.W.L.Au,Z.Song,Y.Zhang, Theroleofvariousstructuresintheheadontheformationofthebiosonarbeamofthebaiji(Lipotes vexillifer), The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 139 (2016) 875–880. doi:10.1121/1.4941780

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    Z.Song,Y.Zhang,C.Wei,X.Wang, Inducingrostruminterfacialwavesbyfluid-solidcouplinginaChineseriverdolphin(Lipotesvexillifer), Phys. Rev. E 93 (2016) 012411. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.93.012411

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    doi:10.1142/S2591728518500093

    C.Wei,Z.Song,W.W.L.Au,Y.Zhang,D.Wang, ANumericalEvidenceofBiosonarBeamFormationofaNeonateYangtzeFinlessPorpoise (Neophocaena asiaeorientalis), Journal of Theoretical and Computational Acoustics (2018). doi:10.1142/S2591728518500093

    2018 doi

  29. [37]

    E. Dong, Y. Zhang, Z. Song, T. Zhang, C. Cai, N. X. Fang, Physical modeling and validation of porpoises’ directional emission via hybrid metamaterials, National Science Review 6 (2019) 921–928. doi:10.1093/nsr/nwz085

    2019 doi

  30. [38]

    doi:10.1785/BSSA0880020368

    D.Komatitsch,J.-P.Vilotte,Thespectralelementmethod:Anefficienttooltosimulatetheseismicresponseof2Dand3Dgeologicalstructures, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 88 (1998) 368–392. doi:10.1785/BSSA0880020368

    1998 doi

  31. [39]

    Igel, Computational Seismology: A Practical Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2016

    H. Igel, Computational Seismology: A Practical Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2016. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717409. 001.0001

    2016

  32. [40]

    Fedorov, R

    A. Fedorov, R. Beichel, J. Kalpathy-Cramer, J. Finet, J.-C. Fillion-Robin, S. Pujol, C. Bauer, D. Jennings, F. Fennessy, M. Sonka, J. Buatti, S. Aylward, J. V. Miller, S. Pieper, R. Kikinis, 3D Slicer as an Image Computing Platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network, Magneti...

    2012 doi

  33. [41]

    R. A. Brooks, A quantitative theory of the Hounsfield unit and its application to dual energy scanning, J Comput Assist Tomogr 1 (1977) 487–493. doi:10.1097/00004728-197710000-00016

    1977 doi

  34. [42]

    Blender Foundation, Blender (version 4.4.0) [computer program],, https://www.blender.org/ (Last viewed Jun 25, 2025), 2022

    2025

  35. [43]

    Cignoni, M

    P. Cignoni, M. Callieri, M. Corsini, M. Dellepiane, F. Ganovelli, G. Ranzuglia, MeshLab: An Open-Source Mesh Processing Tool, in: Sixth Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference, 2008, pp. 129–136

    2008

  36. [44]

    Muntoni, P

    A. Muntoni, P. Cignoni, Pymeshlab 2023.12.post3 : A Python interface to MeshLab, 2021

    2023

  37. [45]

    Rieger, W

    J. Rieger, W. Mayer, Y. van Havre, FreeCad, 2001-2024

    2001

  38. [46]

    Coreform LLC, Coreform Cubit (version 2024.8) [computer program],, http://coreform.com (Last viewed Jun 25, 2025), 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    S. J. Owen, M. L. Staten, M. C. Sorensen, Parallel hexahedral meshing from volume fractions, Eng. with Comput. 30 (2014) 301–313. doi:10.1007/s00366-012-0292-8

    2014 doi

  40. [48]

    P. M. Knupp, Algebraic Mesh Quality Metrics, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 23 (2001) 193–218. doi:10.1137/S1064827500371499

    2001 doi

  41. [49]

    S. J. Owen, Parallel Smoothing for Grid-Based Methods., Technical Report SAND2012-6355C, Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), Albuquerque, NM, and Livermore, CA (United States), 2012

    2012

  42. [50]

    J. Gao, Z. Xiao, S. Shen, C. Xu, J. Cai, G. Xu, Improved hexahedral mesh generation from quadrilateral surface meshes, Computers & Structures 307 (2025) 107620. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2024.107620

    2025

  43. [51]

    T. J. Baker, Mesh generation: Art or science?, Progress in Aerospace Sciences 41 (2005) 29–63. doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.02.002

    2005 doi

  44. [52]

    Ahrens, B

    J. Ahrens, B. Geveci, C. Law, ParaView: An End-User Tool for Large-Data Visualization, in: Visualization Handbook, Elsevier, 2005, pp. 717–731. doi:10.1016/B978-012387582-2/50038-1

    2005 doi

  45. [53]

    Komatitsch, Fluid–solid coupling on a cluster of GPU graphics cards for seismic wave propagation, Comptes Rendus

    D. Komatitsch, Fluid–solid coupling on a cluster of GPU graphics cards for seismic wave propagation, Comptes Rendus. Mécanique 339 (2011) 125–135. doi:10.1016/j.crme.2010.11.007

    2011 doi

  46. [54]

    Cozzi, S

    B. Cozzi, S. Huggenberger, H. Oelschläger, Chapter 5 - Head and Senses, in: B. Cozzi, S. Huggenberger, H. Oelschläger (Eds.), Anatomy of Dolphins, Academic Press, San Diego, 2017, pp. 133–196. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-407229-9.00005-1

    2017 doi

  47. [55]

    T. W. Cranford, W. R. Elsberry, W. G. Van Bonn, J. A. Jeffress, M. S. Chaplin, D. J. Blackwood, D. A. Carder, T. Kamolnick, M. A. Todd, S. H. Ridgway, Observation and analysis of sonar signal generation in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus): Evidence for two sonar sou...

    2011 doi

  48. [56]

    C. Wei, Z. Wang, Z. Song, K. Wang, D. Wang, W. W. L. Au, Y. Zhang, Acoustic Property Reconstruction of a Neonate Yangtze Finless Porpoise’s (Neophocaena asiaeorientalis) Head Based on CT Imaging, PLOS ONE 10 (2015) e0121442. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0121442

    2015 doi

  49. [57]

    K. Aki, P. G. Richards, Quantitative Seismology. Theory and Methods., Univ Science Books, Freeman, San Francisco, 1980

    1980

  50. [58]

    W. W. L. Au, The Sonar of Dolphins, Springer, New York, NY, 1993. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4356-4

    1993 doi

  51. [59]

    Dobbins, Dolphin sonar—modelling a new receiver concept, Bioinspir

    P. Dobbins, Dolphin sonar—modelling a new receiver concept, Bioinspir. Biomim. 2 (2007) 19. doi:10.1088/1748-3182/2/1/003

    2007 doi

  52. [60]

    Bériot, A

    H. Bériot, A. Modave, An automatic perfectly matched layer for acoustic finite element simulations in convex domains of general shape, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 122 (2021) 1239–1261. doi:10.1002/nme.6560

    2021 doi

  53. [61]

    K. S. Norris, G. W. Harvey, Sound transmission in the porpoise head, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 56 (1974) 659–664. doi:10.1121/1.1903305

    1974 doi

  54. [62]

    V.A.Ryabov,TheRoleofAsymmetryoftheLeftandRightExternalEarofBottlenoseDolphin(Tursiopstruncatus)intheSpatialLocalization of Sound, Acoust. Phys. 69 (2023) 119–131. doi:10.1134/S1063771022060112

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    Ryabov, Role of the mental foramens in dolphin hearing, Natural Science 2 (2010) 646–653

    V. Ryabov, Role of the mental foramens in dolphin hearing, Natural Science 2 (2010) 646–653. doi:10.4236/ns.2010.26081

    2010

  56. [64]

    Ryabov, Mechanisms of Sound Reception and Conduction in the Dolphin V

    V. Ryabov, Mechanisms of Sound Reception and Conduction in the Dolphin V. A. Ryabov, Biophysics 59 (2014) 475–483. doi:10.1134/ S0006350914030208. C. García A.et al.: Preprint Page 15 of 15

    2014

Pith tools

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