MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003633545 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2008.979

Time-delay estimation in ultrasound echo signals using individual sample tracking

2008· article· en· W2003633545 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Zahiri-Azar, Septimiu E. Salcudean

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSharif University of Technology
KeywordsEstimatorComputer scienceImpulse responseSignal processingEcho (communications protocol)Impulse (physics)Tracking (education)AlgorithmMathematicsRadarTelecommunicationsPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of many signal-processing applications in ultrasound medical imaging, including elastography, blood flow imaging, tissue velocity imaging, and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging, depends on the performance of their time-delay estimators. In this paper, we present a new time-delay estimator based on the tracking of individual samples using a continuous representation of the echo signal. We also present the use of the same interpolation approach to improve the performance of the zero-crossing tracking delay estimator. Simulation results show that sample tracking algorithms significantly outperform commonly used window-based algorithms in terms of bias and standard deviation. Sample tracking algorithms also have higher sensitivity and resolution compared with traditional delay estimators, including recently introduced spline-based continuous time-delay estimators, because they provide the displacement of individual samples. Experimental results demonstrating the viability of sample tracking delay estimation are also presented.

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)0.005
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

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

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

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207