MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099303494 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2005.1603116

Modern implementation of a realtime 3D beamformer and scan converter system

2006· article· en· W2099303494 on OpenAlexaff
Kieran Wall, G.R. Lockwood

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceGate arrayComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a high-speed 3D parallel beamformer and scan conversion system for a 5.0MHz 2D curved phased array transducer. The system uses Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA)s to implement 288 receive channels. Each channel contains a 4ksample circular RAM buffer, delay calculation unit, interpolation unit, and apodization unit. The FPGA accepts a 12 bit parallel signal from 65MS/s ADCs, while internal processing clocks run at 200MHz. The imaged region was selected in order to minimize FPGA hardware requirements while providing minimal loss in image quality. Eighty image lines are produced synchronously, each with 246 axial points per line. The beamformer is capable of a sustained throughput of 100M beamformed samples/s. An onboard PCI interface transfers the processed data to PC RAM for scan conversion. A Graphic Processing Unit (GPU) shader program performs the envelope detection, scan conversion, and image display in real time. The design was tested by comparing computer simulations of the gate array design with a theoretical model of the beamformer. Two- way radiation pattern simulations show the sidelobes produced by the beamformer roll off to approximately -73 dB, for an ideal point target at 200 wavelengths. Routed hardware timing results allow for processing clock speeds of up to 282MHz - almost a third faster then our target clock speed. Keywords-Beamformer, FPGA, 3D, Real-time

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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207