A compensative model for the angle‐dependence of motion estimates in noninvasive vascular elastography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Atherosclerosis of peripheral cerebral arteries can lead to stroke either by stenosis formation or plaque rupture. This pathology is initiated by the alteration of arterial wall mechanical properties shown to be assessable by ultrasound elastography. Recently, noninvasive vascular elastography (NIVE) was introduced for noninvasive imaging of the mechanical properties of superficial arteries as markers of vulnerable plaques. However, NIVE motion estimates are angle-dependent, with optimal scanning angle being represented by the alignment of tissue motion with ultrasound beam orientation. The objective of this study was to introduce a model that compensates for such angle-dependence in order to reduce the bias on strain estimates, namely, when investigating longitudinal vessel segments. METHODS: The model is based on the Lagrangian speckle model estimator (LSME) because the LSME assesses the 2D-deformation matrix required to compute the scanning angle. RESULTS: Experiments on vessel-mimicking phantoms indicated that such a model enables the estimation of scanning angle with less than 3-degrees error. The method was also validated in vivo in human carotid arteries where less than 4-degrees error was observed. In both cases, the compensative model estimated the inclination angles with low variability. CONCLUSION: Angle-dependence may be an important factor to consider in avoiding potentially distort clinical diagnoses. Results, reported in this article, suggest that the LSME-based compensative model might be considered as a very interesting and promising clinical tool for NIVE applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".