MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A source wavelet deconvolution approach to improve the spatial resolution for radar-based breast imaging system

2013· article· en· W2043778571 on OpenAlexaff
Kay Y. Liu, Elise Fear

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeconvolutionWaveletComputer scienceImage resolutionMicrowave imagingRadar imagingIterative reconstructionComputer visionRadarBreast imagingArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMammographyMicrowaveTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In microwave breast imaging, image reconstruction involves tomographic reconstruction, radar-based imaging, or some combination of both methods (J. F. Deprez, et al., PIER B, 42, 381-403, 2012). With radar-based techniques, similar basic processing steps, i.e., calibration and skin subtraction are taken to process the raw data prior to their deployment in Kirchhoff summation (image focusing). Usually, minimal consideration is given to improve the temporal resolution of the raw signals. However, the spatial resolution associated with the reconstructed image is a function of the temporal resolution of raw data. With simple breast phantoms, i.e., homogeneous breast volume with a single inclusion, an image with low spatial resolution may give a relatively accurate estimate of inclusion location, however lacks sensitivities to the changes in its size. With complicated breast phantoms, i.e., heterogeneous breast volume with multiple malignant and benign inclusions, low imaging resolution may blur malignant inclusions into adjacent features. Inspired by seismic imaging data processing workflow, we propose the method of source wavelet deconvolution for pre-processing prior to Kirchhoff summation. The idea is to improve the temporal resolution of calibrated raw data by compressing the source wavelet. We also propose the method of picking the first break (arrival) of wave propagation for the purpose of locating the scatterer in the signal. Previously, the signals were integrated prior to Kirchhoff summation, which assumes that a local maximum indicates the round-trip distance between the antenna and the scatterer. In reality, this assumption is not always true due to the complexity of wave propagation (A. Ishimaru, 1997). In this sense, the proposed new processing workflow can be described as improved calibration, skin subtraction, deconvolution, and reconstruction.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207