MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049198657 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/19/5909

Sparsity regularization in dynamic elastography

2012· article· en· W2049198657 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Honarvar, Ramin S. Sahebjavaher, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Robert Rohling

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDefense Threat Reduction Agency
KeywordsMagnetic resonance elastographyTikhonov regularizationRegularization (linguistics)Finite element methodElastographyInverse problemIsotropyElasticity (physics)CompressibilityMathematicsImaging phantomRegularization perspectives on support vector machinesApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationAlgorithmComputer scienceMathematical analysisPhysicsAcousticsMechanicsArtificial intelligenceUltrasound

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the inverse problem of continuum mechanics with the tissue deformation described by a mixed displacement-pressure finite element formulation. The mixed formulation is used to model nearly incompressible materials by simultaneously solving for both elasticity and pressure distributions. To improve numerical conditioning, a common solution to this problem is to use regularization to constrain the solutions of the inverse problem. We present a sparsity regularization technique that uses the discrete cosine transform to transform the elasticity and pressure fields to a sparse domain in which a smaller number of unknowns is required to represent the original field. We evaluate the approach by solving the dynamic elastography problem for synthetic data using such a mixed finite element technique, assuming time harmonic motion, and linear, isotropic and elastic behavior for the tissue. We compare our simulation results to those obtained using the more common Tikhonov regularization. We show that the sparsity regularization is less dependent on boundary conditions, less influenced by noise, requires no parameter tuning and is computationally faster. The algorithm has been tested on magnetic resonance elastography data captured from a CIRS elastography phantom with similar results as the simulation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207