MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109678738 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2013.0388

Image quality improvement based on inter-frame motion compensation for photoacoustic imaging: A preliminary study

2013· article· en· W2109678738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Minjae Kim, Jeeun Kang, Jin Ho Chang, Tai‐Kyong Song, Yangmo Yoo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage qualityLaserMaterials scienceOpticsSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Imaging phantomImage resolutionMotion compensationFrame rateBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsImage (mathematics)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photoacoustic imaging (PAI) is capable of providing real-time anatomical and functional information of pathological changes. In PAI, the frame averaging (FA) technique is commonly used for enhancing signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) instead of increasing the power of a pulsed laser to avoid unwanted adverse effects. However, the FA technique suffers from motion artifacts due to the limited pulse repetition frequencies (PRFs) (e.g., 10-20 Hz) of a commonly-used Nd:Yag laser. In this paper, to improve the image quality of PAI, a new FA technique combined with inter-frame motion compensation (i.e., FA-IFMC) is proposed. The RF data acquisition was conducted with a commercial ultrasound imaging system (Ultrasonix Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada) for the 0.9-mm diameter graphite lead-injected chicken breast. For the laser excitation, a Surelite Nd:YAG OPO system (Continuum Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used at the rate of 10 Hz and at the wavelength of 700nm with a bifurcated fiber bundle. From the phantom experiment, peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and the axial resolution were improved by 15.8 dB and 1.06 mm compared to the conventional FA method, respectively. These results indicate that the suggested FA-IFMC method can improve image quality of PAI by enhancing PSNR and axial resolution due to the lowerd blurring artifacts from motions.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207