MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988613220 · doi:10.1117/12.2007140

Adaptive sound speed correction for abdominal ultrasonography: preliminary results

2013· article· en· W1988613220 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sungmin Jin, Jeeun Kang, Tai-Kyung Song, Yangmo Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Knowledge Economy
KeywordsSpeed of soundImaging phantomAcousticsRegion of interestTransducerComputer scienceImage qualityBeamformingImage resolutionComputer visionImage (mathematics)PhysicsOpticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasonography has been conducting a critical role in assessing abdominal disorders due to its noninvasive, real-time, low cost, and deep penetrating capabilities. However, for imaging obese patients with a thick fat layer, it is challenging to achieve appropriate image quality with a conventional beamforming (CON) method due to phase aberration caused by the difference between sound speeds (e.g., 1580 and 1450m/s for liver and fat, respectively). For this, various sound speed correction (SSC) methods that estimate the accumulated sound speed for a region-of interest (ROI) have been previously proposed. However, with the SSC methods, the improvement in image quality was limited only for a specific depth of ROI. In this paper, we present the adaptive sound speed correction (ASSC) method, which can enhance the image quality for whole depths by using estimated sound speeds from two different depths in the lower layer. Since these accumulated sound speeds contain the respective contributions of layers, an optimal sound speed for each depth can be estimated by solving contribution equations. To evaluate the proposed method, the phantom study was conducted with pre-beamformed radio-frequency (RF) data acquired with a SonixTouch research package (Ultrasonix Corp., Canada) with linear and convex probes from the gel pad-stacked tissue mimicking phantom (Parker Lab. Inc., USA and Model539, ATS, USA) whose sound speeds are 1610 and 1450m/s, respectively. From the study, compared to the CON and SSC methods, the ASSC method showed the improved spatial resolution and information entropy contrast (IEC) for convex and linear array transducers, respectively. These results indicate that the ASSC method can be applied for enhancing image quality when imaging obese patients in abdominal ultrasonography.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207