Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 48 references

Resonance behavior of a bubble near a spherical inclusion

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a single analytical model, built from the linearized equations of a viscous compressible liquid, predicts how a gas microbubble's resonance frequencies and amplitudes shift when it sits near a rigid, fluid, or viscoel

desk verdict Solid multipole model for bubble-sphere resonance, but the mechanosensing application is overclaimed: the inclusion is never directly insonified and no inversion is shown. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.17575 v2 pith:IJHYMHVM submitted 2025-12-19 physics.flu-dyn

Thomas Micol , Alexander A. Doinikov , Cyril Mauger , Claude Inserra This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords microbubbleresonancefrequencysphericalinclusionviscoelasticmultipoleexpansionelastographyviscouscompressiblefluid
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 aims to establish that the linear frequency response of a gas microbubble near a spherical inclusion of arbitrary size and mechanical nature is governed by one analytical model based on the first-order equations of a viscous compressible liquid. It predicts how the resonance frequencies and amplitudes of radial and shape modes change with bubble size, sphere radius, material properties, and distance. The central result is that the bubble's spectral response acts as an acoustic fingerprint of the neighboring object, so scanning it offers a route to recover the inclusion's mechanical properties by inverse modeling. A sympathetic reader would care because this could turn a standard ultrasound contrast agent into a local probe for tissue and cell stiffness at the microscale.

What carries the argument

The central object is the coupled multipole expansion of the velocity potentials in the two spherical coordinate systems, with the bubble's scattered wave re-expressed in the sphere's coordinates and vice versa using translation formulas involving Clebsch-Gordan coefficients. This lets the authors assemble a linear system of boundary conditions—normal velocity and tangential stress at the bubble surface, and velocity/stress continuity at the sphere—whose solution yields the scattering coefficients of every mode and hence the bubble's modal amplitudes as functions of frequency and distance.

What would settle it

Measure the frequency response of a 10-micron bubble near a well-characterized viscoelastic microsphere whose stiffness and viscosity are known independently, while the incident ultrasound insonifies both objects, and check whether the bubble's resonance-frequency shift and quality factor match the model's predictions and whether the sphere's own resonances appear at the predicted peaks. A mismatch in the sphere-resonance peaks would indicate the passive-inclusion assumption fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims to derive, from linearized mass and momentum conservation in a viscous compressible liquid, a complete analytical description of a small gas bubble oscillating near a sphere of arbitrary size and mechanical nature. The model accounts for both the bubble's radial breathing mode and its nonspherical surface modes, and it treats the sphere as rigid, as a viscous compressible fluid, or as a viscoelastic solid by matching velocities and stresses at the sphere surface. It reproduces known limits far from the sphere and near planar walls, and it predicts that the radial resonance frequency shifts down as a rigid sphere approaches, shifts up near a compliant air sphere, and shows a

Load-bearing premise

The nearby sphere is assumed to move only because of the wave the bubble radiates, not because of the external ultrasound wave that drives the bubble, which may not hold in real experiments where the incident wave hits the sphere directly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single frequency sweep of a bubble can in principle distinguish among air, rigid, and viscoelastic neighboring objects through changes in resonance frequency, amplitude, and quality factor.
  • Near a soft viscoelastic sphere of comparable size, resonance peaks of the sphere itself can appear in the bubble's response, so the bubble can detect internal acoustic resonances of a nearby object.
  • For sufficiently large spheres, the model's predictions reduce to known planar-boundary results, meaning curvature effects matter mainly for small inclusions comparable to the bubble size.
  • Shape-mode resonance shifts are generally small (a few percent and less) and appear only at very short distances, so radial-mode information is the more robust sensor channel.
  • The (resonance-frequency shift, quality factor, distance) space provides material-specific signatures that can support inversion of mechanical properties.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the model's scanning claim holds, a natural extension is to invert not just the resonance peak but the full measured frequency response to extract multiple mechanical parameters (Young modulus and viscosity) simultaneously, since each parameter shifts amplitude, peak position, and Q differently.
  • The model's assumption that the sphere is only driven by the bubble's scattered field suggests that in experiments with free-floating cells the incident ultrasound may directly excite the cell, so a testable extension would deliberately compare this passive-inclusion model with an insonified-inclusion version to bound the error.
  • The same multipole machinery could likely be extended to multiple neighboring spheres or to nonspherical inclusions by summing translation contributions, permitting bubble-based mapping of heterogeneous microstructures rather than a single local object.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents an analytical model for the linear frequency response of a gas microbubble near a spherical inclusion (rigid, fluid, or viscoelastic) in a viscous compressible liquid. The model is derived from the linearized equations of motion via Helmholtz decomposition, with boundary conditions expressed through multipole expansions and coordinate transformations between the bubble and sphere centers. Both radial and shape modes are considered. The authors validate the model against the linearized Rayleigh–Plesset equation, the Lamb shape-mode frequencies, and the planar-wall limits of Strasberg and Hay. They then present forward simulations showing how resonance frequencies and quality factors change with sphere size, distance, and material, and propose scanning this response as a basis for inverse mechanical characterization of microscopic objects such as biological cells.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a unified, parameter-free analytical framework for bubble–sphere interaction that goes beyond existing planar-wall models and handles curvature, viscosity, compressibility, and viscoelasticity consistently. The careful benchmarking against established limits is a genuine strength, and the observation that cell-mimicking inclusions can exhibit resonances near the bubble resonance (Fig. 10b) is physically interesting. However, the inverse-elastography claim is not yet demonstrated: the paper shows forward 'fingerprints' but no actual inversion, no noise analysis, and no sensitivity or identifiability study. The application-oriented part of the abstract and conclusion is therefore stronger than the evidence presented.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III C and Conclusion] The central application claim is that scanning the bubble frequency response allows the inclusion's mechanical properties to be recovered 'through inverse modeling' (Abstract, Conclusion). The paper, however, only presents forward maps: resonance frequency and quality factor as functions of material parameters (Figs. 11–12). There is no inversion of synthetic or experimental data, no study of noise sensitivity, and no discussion of whether the mapping is one-to-one (e.g., glycerin vs PMMA appear nearly degenerate in Fig. 11, and the authors themselves note ambiguity that they propose to resolve with an additional dimension). As written, the inverse-elastography claim is speculative. I would ask the authors to either provide a proof-of-principle inversion (e.g., recover known material parameters from synthetic noisy response curves) or explicitly reframe the conclusion as 'forward modelin
  2. [Sec. III B 2; Eqs. (B25)–(B28), (B49)–(B52)] The model assumes the spherical inclusion is excited only by the wave scattered by the bubble, not by the external driving pressure. This is explicit for the air sphere in Sec. III B 2 ('the air sphere is assumed to oscillate only in response to the acoustic field radiated by the bubble, without being influenced by the external driving wave') and is implicit in the sphere boundary conditions, where no incident-field term appears. In a real elastography experiment the incident ultrasound wave insonifies both the bubble and the inclusion. For a viscoelastic cell (e.g., CMM, Fig. 10b) with resonances near the bubble resonance, direct driving of the cell would add scattering contributions and could shift or alter the very fingerprints used for characterization. This is not a flaw of the model as a mathematical derivation, but it is a load-bearing assumption for the proposed measurement proto
  3. [Sec. II B 3 and Sec. III (preamble)] Shape-mode resonance frequencies are not obtained as poles of the unforced system but by forcing the bubble with Pac Σ Pn(µ1) and reading the peak of the modal amplitude sn. The text explicitly acknowledges (Sec. II B 3) that 'the proposed method does not allow the characterization of the resonance frequency of these modes' before introducing the special forcing. For a damped, driven oscillator the peak response frequency differs from the undamped natural frequency, and in a coupled multiple-scattering system the peak of a particular sn can be affected by neighboring modes. Thus the quantities reported in Figs. 3, 5, 7(c), 9(c) as 'resonance frequencies' are operationally defined as forced-response maxima, not derived natural frequencies. This does not invalidate the forward predictions if that is the intended definition, but the distinction should be stated clearly and the term 'natural
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eqs. (10) and (57)] The symbol δ is used both for the viscous penetration depth in Eq. (10) and for the total damping coefficient in the Rayleigh–Plesset comparison Eq. (57). These are different quantities; please rename one to avoid confusion.
  2. [Sec. III B (preamble)] The statement that 'a threshold value for the sphere radius exists ... above which convergence is not reached' is too vague. Which physical and numerical parameters determine the threshold, and how does the truncation N_t affect the reported results? Please provide a short convergence analysis or at least report the N_t values used, so the reader can assess the reliability of the large-sphere results.
  3. [Figures 5, 7, 9, 12] The word 'insert' in several captions (e.g., Fig. 5(a), Fig. 10) should be 'inset'. Also, in Fig. 10(b) the inset is described as 'the particle's response' but the units and normalization of u_0 are not given; please add.
  4. [Sec. III B 1] The sentence 'as the radius of the rigid sphere increases, the resonance frequency curve progressively tends to that of the infinite wall' is followed by the observation that even R20 = 40R10 differs noticeably from the plane-wall case. The wording is confusing; please distinguish 'tends in the limit' from 'is still measurably different at the largest computed radius.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: derivation is self-contained and validated against independent benchmarks.

full rationale

The central derivation starts from the linearized equations of motion (2)-(4), imposes the fluid and solid boundary conditions at both the bubble and the sphere surfaces (15)-(16), (18)-(19), (24)-(27), (40)-(43), and closes the system with the linearized normal-stress condition (47)/(B72). The modal amplitudes and scattering coefficients are obtained by solving the resulting linear system; no parameter is fitted to the claimed resonance frequencies or frequency-response curves. The unbounded-liquid checks against the Rayleigh-Plesset model (Eq. (57)) and Lamb's formula (Eq. (60)), and the plane-wall checks against Strasberg (Eqs. (61)-(62)) and Hay et al. are external benchmarks, not internal inputs. The paper does cite prior work by one of the authors (e.g., [13-16]) and uses [25] to motivate modal truncation, but the model also performs its own convergence analysis, and these citations do not supply the predicted resonance behavior. The explicit assumption that the air sphere is driven only by the bubble-radiated field is a physical modeling limitation that could affect inverse-elastography interpretations in experiments where the incident wave also insonifies the inclusion, but it is not a circular step: it is a stated boundary excitation choice, not a fitted input disguised as a prediction. Likewise, identifying resonance with the frequency of maximum computed amplitude is a methodological convention, not a self-referential fit. No equation or prediction reduces by construction to its own input, and no self-citation chain forces the central results.

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

No parameters are fitted to the target results; all material constants are taken from the cited literature and the model is checked against independent known limits. The main paper-specific assumptions are the passive-inclusion approximation and the artificial shape-mode forcing used to extract resonance frequencies.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Linearized viscous-compressible flow equations (2)-(4) with harmonic time dependence and outgoing-wave solutions.
    Underpins the entire field description; restricts validity to small amplitudes and neglects thermal and nonlinear effects.
  • standard math Multipole translation theorems (A1)-(A2), (A9)-(A10) from Varshalovich et al.
    Basis for expressing bubble-centered waves in sphere-centered coordinates; accuracy of these identities is assumed.
  • ad hoc to paper The inclusion is excited only by the bubble's scattered field, not by the external driving wave.
    Used for all sphere types; explicitly acknowledged only for the air sphere in Sec. III B 2. In real experiments the incident ultrasound would directly excite the cell.
  • ad hoc to paper Shape-mode natural frequencies are obtained by forcing with Pac Σ Pn(µ1) and reading the peak response.
    Used in Sec. II B 3 to extract shape-mode resonances; the peak of a damped forced response is treated as the resonance frequency.
  • domain assumption Viscoelastic sphere obeys Eq. (30) with Kelvin-Voigt-type parameters.
    Constitutive model for PMMA, PVA, and CMM; material parameters are taken from the literature.
  • domain assumption Bubble gas follows a polytropic pressure-volume law with ratio γ.
    Used in Eq. (47); standard for linear bubble dynamics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Resonance behavior of a bubble near a spherical inclusion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IJHYMHVM

@misc{pith2026251217575,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Resonance behavior of a bubble near a spherical inclusion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IJHYMHVM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.17575}
}
read the original abstract

We present an analytical model for the frequency response of a gas microbubble oscillating near a spherical inclusion of arbitrary size and mechanical nature (rigid, fluid, or viscoelastic) immersed in a viscous compressible fluid. The model considers both radial and nonspherical oscillations in the linear regime and predicts how their resonance frequencies and oscillation amplitudes are altered by the bubble size, material properties, and distance to the nearby sphere. As a key application, we demonstrate that scanning the frequency response of a bubble near a viscoelastic object, such as an erythrocyte-like particle mimicking a biological cell, offers a way to recover its mechanical properties through inverse modeling, opening new possibilities for high-resolution elastography at the microscale.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.17575 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Coordinate systems used in the theoretical model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Frequency response of the radial mode for a bubble [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The resonance frequencies of shape modes ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Frequency response of a gas bubble with the equi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Frequency response of a gas bubble with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Normalized resonance frequency of the radial mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a) Frequency response of a gas bubble with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Frequency response of a 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Spectral fingerprint of the bubble near different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Evolution of the quality factor and the resonance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references

  1. [1]

    These conditions can be written by vr = 0,(18) vθ = 0,(19) atr 2 =R 20

    Case of a rigid sphere The boundary conditions on the surface of a rigid sphere require that both the normal and tangential com- ponents ofvvanish. These conditions can be written by vr = 0,(18) vθ = 0,(19) atr 2 =R 20. The radial component of the velocity field vr =v (1) r +v (2) r is calculated in the coordinate system of the sphere (r 2, θ2) using the ...

  2. [2]

    Case of a viscous compressible fluid sphere We now consider a viscous compressible fluid sphere centered at the origin of the coordinates system (r 2, θ2), with densityρ s, sound speedc s, volume fluid viscosityξ s and dynamic viscosityη s. The velocity potentials of the wave inside the sphere can be written by ˆφ(r2, θ2, t) = e−iωt ∞X n=0 ˆanjn(ˆkar2)Pn(...

  3. [3]

    A solution to Eq

    Case of a solid viscoelastic sphere We now consider a solid viscoelastic sphere centered at the origin of the coordinates system (r 2, θ2), and we assume that the motion of the viscoelastic medium inside the sphere obeys the following equation [24]: ρp ∂2u ∂t2 =µ p∇2u+ (λ p +µ p)∇(∇·u) +η p∇2 ∂u ∂t + ξp + 1 3 ηp ∇ ∇· ∂u ∂t ,(30) whereuis the displacement ...

  4. [4]

    (47) (i.e., Eq

    Radial pulsation and resonance frequency of the bubble The result of Eq. (47) (i.e., Eq. (B72)) shows that the amplitude of the radial modes 0 is given by s0 = 1 ρ0R10ω2 0 −P ac +a (1) 0 2ηk2 ah(1)′′ 0 (xa1) −k 2 a iρ0c2 ω + ξ− 2 3 η h(1) 0 (xa1) + 2ηk2 aj′′ 0 (xa1) −k 2 a iρ0c2 ω + ξ− 2 3 η j0(xa1) ∞X m=0 a(2) m F0m , (48) where ω0 = 1 R10 s 3γPg0 ρ0 − 2...

  5. [5]

    It is thus useful to compute the amplitude of the modess n, and the first boundary condition at the surface of the bubble, Eq

    Shape oscillation amplitude due to multiple scattering In addition to the excitation of the radial oscillation of the bubble, the wave scattered by the sphere will excite all modes. It is thus useful to compute the amplitude of the modess n, and the first boundary condition at the surface of the bubble, Eq. (B3), is re-written using Eq. (46), leading to ∞...

  6. [6]

    Due to the multiple scattering induced by the presence of a nearby particle, nonspherical oscillations are triggered at the bubble in- terface

    Resonance frequency of moden The external forcing chosen here, of the formP ace−iωt, describes a uniform pressure field that naturally excites the radial oscillation of the bubble. Due to the multiple scattering induced by the presence of a nearby particle, nonspherical oscillations are triggered at the bubble in- terface. These oscillations occur at the ...

  7. [7]

    Amplitude and resonance frequency of the radial oscillations Assuming purely radial oscillations, the predictions of the present model can be compared with those of the classical linearized Rayleigh–Plesset equation, in which damping is introduced in anad hocmanner to account for viscous and compressibility effects. The amplitude of the linearized radial ...

  8. [8]

    Resonance frequency of higher-order modes (n≥2) The resonance frequencies associated with non-radial (shape) oscillation modes of a gas bubble were first de- rived by Lamb [26] under the assumptions of an incom- pressible and inviscid liquid. In this idealized case, the natural angular frequency of thenth mode is given by ωn = s σ(n−1)(n+ 1)(n+ 2) ρ0R3 10...

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    A gas bubble with the equilibrium radiusR 10 = 10µm is posi- tioned near a rigid sphere of radiusR 20 = 40R10, which is located at various distances from the bubble

    Rigid sphere The case of a rigid sphere is first investigated. A gas bubble with the equilibrium radiusR 10 = 10µm is posi- tioned near a rigid sphere of radiusR 20 = 40R10, which is located at various distances from the bubble. Figure 4(a) presents the frequency response of t...

  2. [10]

    As a first step, the sphere is assumed to be air, with the parametersρ s = 1.2 kg m−3,c s = 343 m s−1, ξs = 0 Pa s andη s = 18.25×10 −6 Pa s

    Fluid sphere We now consider the case of an air bubble located near a fluid sphere. As a first step, the sphere is assumed to be air, with the parametersρ s = 1.2 kg m−3,c s = 343 m s−1, ξs = 0 Pa s andη s = 18.25×10 −6 Pa s. The frequency response of a bubble with the equilib...

    1920

  3. [11]

    Three materials have been chosen with the aim of investi- gating various elastic moduli and shear viscosity, namely PMMA, PV A, and CMM whose mechanical properties are given below

    Viscoelastic sphere The nearby sphere is now assumed to be composed of a solid material with viscoelastic mechanical properties. Three materials have been chosen with the aim of investi- gating various elastic moduli and shear viscosity, namely PMMA, PV A, and CMM whose mechan...

  4. [12]

    acoustic fingerprint

    model of a bubble near a rigid plane, Eq. (61), or with the model of Hayet al.[17] that predicts the radial dynamics of a bubble close to a viscoelastic wall. PMMA (polymethyl methacrylate) is an acrylic glass widely used in engineering, whose mechanical proper- ties areρ p = ...

  5. [13]

    Bubble – Normal velocity and tangential stress From Eq. (15), one obtains, forn≥0, a(1) n xa1h(1)′ n (xa1)−b (1) n n(n+ 1)h (1) n (xv1) + ∞X m=0 a(2) m Fnmxa1j′ n (xa1) − ∞X m=0 b(2) m n(n+ 1)H nmjn (xv1) =−iωR 10 MNX m=M1 smδmn,(B1) wherex a1 =k aR10,x v1 =k vR10 andδ nm is t...

  6. [14]

    Rigid sphere – Normal and tangential velocities From Eq. (18), one obtains, forn≥0, ∞X m=0 a(1) m Enmxa2j′ n (xa2) − ∞X m=0 b(1) m n(n+ 1)G nmjn (xv2) +a(2) n xa2h(1)′ n (xa2)−b (2) n n(n+ 1)h (1) n (xv2) = 0,(B13) wherex a2 =k aR20 andx v2 =k vR20. From Eq. (19), one obtains,...

  7. [15]

    Viscous compressible fluid sphere – Normal and tangential velocities and stresses From Eq. (24), one obtains, forn≥0, xa2j′ n (xa2) ∞X m=0 a(1) m Enm −n(n+ 1)j n (xv2) ∞X m=1 b(1) m Gnm +a(2) n xa2h(1)′ n (xa2)−b (2) n n(n+ 1)h (1) n (xv2) −ˆan ˆxa2j′ n(ˆxa2) + ˆbnn(n+ 1)j n(ˆ...

  8. [16]

    Solid viscoelastic sphere – Normal and tangential velocities and stresses From Eq. (40), one obtains, forn≥0, xa2j′ n (xa2) ∞X m=0 a(1) m Enm −n(n+ 1)j n (xv2) ∞X m=1 b(1) m Gnm +a(2) n xa2h(1)′ n (xa2)−b (2) n n(n+ 1)h (1) n (xv2) +iωˆanxlj′ n(xl)−iω ˆbnn(n+ 1)j n(xt) = 0,(B4...

  9. [17]

    (47) yields Pg0 =P 0 + 2σ R10 ,(B69) and σrr|r1=R10 =P ace−iωt + e−iωt ∞X n=0 3γPg0 R10 δn0 + σ(n−1)(n+ 2) R2 10 snPn(µ1)

    Bubble – Normal stress The perturbed bubble volume, accurate to the first- order terms, is calculated by V1 = Z 2π 0 dε1 Z π 0 sinθ 1dθ1 Z R10+s 0 r2 1dr1 ≈V 10 + 4πR2 10s0e−iωt.(B65) The value ofH, accurate to the first-order terms, is cal- culated by H=− 1 R10 + s R2 10 + 1 ...

  10. [18]

    J. Guck, S. Schinkinger, B. Lincoln, F. Wottawah, S. Ebert, M. Romeyke,et al., Optical deformability as an inherent cell marker for testing malignant transfor- mation and metastatic competence, Biophys. J.88, 3689 (2005)

    2005

  11. [19]

    Ophir, I

    J. Ophir, I. Cespedes, H. Ponnekanti, Y. Yazdi, and X. Li, Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues, Ultrason. Imaging13, 111 (1991)

    1991

  12. [20]

    A. P. Sarvazyan, O. V. Rudenko, S. D. Swanson, J. B. Fowlkes, and S. Y. Emelianov, Shear wave elasticity imaging: a new ultrasonic technology of medical diag- nostics, Ultrasound Med. Biol.24, 1419 (1998)

    1998

  13. [21]

    Bouchet, O

    D. Bouchet, O. Stephan, B. Dollet, P. Marmottant, and E. Bossy, Near-field acoustic imaging with a caged bub- ble, Nat. Commun.15, 10275 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    M. S. Plesset and A. Prosperetti, Bubble dynamics and cavitation, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.9, 145 (1977). 20

    1977

  15. [23]

    T. G. Leighton,The Acoustic Bubble(Academic Press, London, 1994)

    1994

  16. [24]

    Johnsen and T

    E. Johnsen and T. Colonius, Shock-induced collapse of a gas bubble in shockwave lithotripsy, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 2011 (2008)

    2011

  17. [25]

    Hoff,Acoustic Characterization of Contrast Agents for Medical Ultrasound Imaging(Springer Science & Busi- ness Media, Berlin, 2001)

    L. Hoff,Acoustic Characterization of Contrast Agents for Medical Ultrasound Imaging(Springer Science & Busi- ness Media, Berlin, 2001)

    2001

  18. [26]

    Ferrara, R

    K. Ferrara, R. Pollard, and M. Borden, Ultrasound mi- crobubble contrast agents: fundamentals and application to gene and drug delivery, Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng.9, 415 (2007)

    2007

  19. [27]

    Dollet, P

    B. Dollet, P. Marmottant, and V. Garbin, Bubble dy- namics in soft and biological matter, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.51, 331 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    Vincent and P

    O. Vincent and P. Marmottant, On the statics and dy- namics of fully confined bubbles, J. Fluid Mech.827, 194 (2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    Strasberg, The pulsation frequency of nonspherical gas bubbles in liquids, J

    M. Strasberg, The pulsation frequency of nonspherical gas bubbles in liquids, J. Acoust. Soc. Am.25, 536 (1953)

    1953

  22. [30]

    A. A. Doinikov, S. Zhao, and P. A. Dayton, Modeling of the acoustic response from contrast agent microbubbles near a rigid wall, Ultrasonics49, 195 (2009)

    2009

  23. [31]

    A. A. Doinikov, L. Aired, and A. Bouakaz, Acoustic scat- tering from a contrast agent microbubble near an elastic wall of finite thickness, Phys. Med. Biol.56, 6951 (2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    A. A. Doinikov, L. Aired, and A. Bouakaz, Dynamics of a contrast agent microbubble attached to an elastic wall, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging31, 654 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    A. A. Doinikov and A. Bouakaz, Interaction of an ultrasound-activated contrast microbubble with a wall at arbitrary separation distances, Phys. Med. Biol.60, 7909 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    T. A. Hay, Y. A. Ilinskii, E. A. Zabolotskaya, and M. F. Hamilton, Model for bubble pulsation in liquid between parallel viscoelastic layers, J. Acoust. Soc. Am.132, 124 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Maksimov, Splitting of the surface modes for bub- ble oscillations near a boundary, Phys

    A. Maksimov, Splitting of the surface modes for bub- ble oscillations near a boundary, Phys. Fluids32, 102106 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    Corbett,A numerical study of the shape mode oscil- lation of microbubbles in a viscous compressible liquid, Ph.D

    C. Corbett,A numerical study of the shape mode oscil- lation of microbubbles in a viscous compressible liquid, Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Liu and S

    B. Liu and S. Bhattacharya, Natural frequencies of a bub- ble near a solid sphere, AIP Adv.12, 085020 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Fluid Mechanics, 2nd ed., Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 6 (Elsevier, Ox- ford, 1987)

    1987

  31. [39]

    Arfken, H

    G. Arfken, H. J. Weber, and F. E. Harris,Mathemati- cal Methods for Physicists(Academic Press, San Diego, 1985)

    1985

  32. [40]

    Abramowitz and I

    M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun,Handbook of Mathe- matical Functions(Dover Publications, New York, 1965)

    1965

  33. [41]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Theory of Elasticity, Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 7 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1970)

    1970

  34. [42]

    A. A. Doinikov, G. Regnault, C. Mauger, P. Blanc- Benon, and C. Inserra, Acoustic microstreaming pro- duced by two interacting gas bubbles undergoing ax- isymmetric shape oscillations, J. Fluid Mech.931, A19 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Lamb,Hydrodynamics(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1895)

    H. Lamb,Hydrodynamics(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1895)

  36. [44]

    Garbin, E

    V. Garbin, E. Ferrari, D. Cojoc, E. Di Fabrizio, M. L. J. Overvelde, S. M. Van Der Meer, M. Versluis, N. De Jong, and D. Lohse, Optical trapping of ultrasound con- trast agent microbubbles: study of the bubble-wall and bubble-bubble interaction in ultrasound, in2006 IEEE Inter...

    2006

  37. [45]

    Mobadersany and K

    N. Mobadersany and K. Sarkar, Acoustic microstreaming near a plane wall due to a pulsating free or coated bubble: velocity, vorticity and closed streamlines, J. Fluid Mech. 875, 781 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    S. R. Bisht, B. P. Marri, J. Karmakar, and K. P. Mer- cado Shekhar, Viscoelastic characterization of phantoms for ultrasound elastography created using low-and high- viscosity poly (vinyl alcohol) with ethylene glycol as the cryoprotectant, ACS Omega9, 8352 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev, and V. K. Kher- sonskii,Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum(World Scientific, Singapore, 1988)

    1988

  40. [48]

    Zwillinger,CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae(Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2002)

    D. Zwillinger,CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae(Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2002)

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.