MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135649431 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2008.820

Simplified inverse filter tracking algorithm for estimating the mean trabecular bone spacing

2008· article· en· W2135649431 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Huang, Dean Ta, Weiqi Wang, Lawrence H. Le

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsCepstrumBackscatter (email)Filter (signal processing)Ultrasonic sensorScale-invariant feature transformAutocorrelationAlgorithmAcousticsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionFeature extractionPhysicsWirelessStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasonic backscatter signals provide useful information relevant to bone tissue characterization. Trabecular bone microstructures have been considered as quasi-periodic tissues with a collection of regular and diffuse scatterers. This paper investigates the potential of a novel technique using a simplified inverse filter tracking (SIFT) algorithm to estimate mean trabecular bone spacing (MTBS) from ultrasonic backscatter signals. In contrast to other frequency-based methods, the SIFT algorithm is a time-based method and utilizes the amplitude and phase information of backscatter echoes, thus retaining the advantages of both the autocorrelation and the cepstral analysis techniques. The SIFT algorithm was applied to backscatter signals from simulations, phantoms, and bovine trabeculae in vitro. The estimated MTBS results were compared with those of the autoregressive (AR) cepstrum and quadratic transformation (QT) . The SIFT estimates are better than the AR cepstrum estimates and are comparable with the QT values. The study demonstrates that the SIFT algorithm has the potential to be a reliable and robust method for the estimation of MTBS in the presence of a small signal-to-noise ratio, a large spacing variation between regular scatterers, and a large scattering strength ratio of diffuse scatterers to regular ones.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207