Tissue typing using ultrasound RF time series: Experiments with animal tissue samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This article provides experimental evidence to show that the time series of radiofrequency (RF) ultrasound data can be used for tissue typing. It also explores the tissue typing information in RF time series. Clinical and high-frequency ultrasound are studied. METHODS: Bovine liver, pig liver, bovine muscle, and chicken breast were used in the experiments as the animal tissue types. In the proposed approach, the authors record RF echo signals backscattered from tissue, while the imaging probe and the tissue are stationary. This sequence of recorded RF data generates a time series of RF echoes for each spatial sample of the RF signal. The authors use spectral and fractal features of ultrasound RF time series averaged over a region of interest, along with feedforward neural networks for tissue typing. The experiments are repeated at ultrasound frequency of 6.6 and also 55 MHz. The effects of increasing power and frame rate are studied. RESULTS: The methodology yielded an average two-class classification accuracy of 95.1% when ultrasound data were acquired at 6.6 MHz and 98.1% when data were collected with a high-frequency probe operating at 55 MHz. In four-class classification experiments, the recorded accuracies were 78.6% and 86.5% for low and high-frequency ultrasound data, respectively. A set of 12 texture features extracted from the B-mode image equivalents of the RF data yields an accuracy of only 77.5% in typing the analyzed tissues. An increase in acoustic power and the frame rate of ultrasound results in an improvement in classification results. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that RF time series can be used for ultrasound-based tissue typing. Further investigation of the underlying physical mechanisms is necessary.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".