Performance evaluation of different implementations of the Lagrangian speckle model estimator for non-invasive vascular ultrasound elastography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-invasive vascular ultrasound elastography (NIVE) was recently introduced to characterize mechanical properties of carotid arteries for stroke prevention. Using the Lagrangian speckle model estimator (LSME), the four components of the 2D deformation matrix (delta), which are the axial strain (delta(yy)) and shear (delta(yx)) and the lateral strain (delta(xx)) and shear (delta(xy)), can be computed. This paper overviews four different implementations of the LSME and addresses their reliability. These implementations include two unconstrained (L&M and L&M+) and one constrained (ITER(c)) iterative algorithms, and one optical flow-based (OF-based) algorithm. The theoretical frameworks were supported by biomechanical simulations of a pathology-free vessel wall and by one single layer vessel-mimicking phantom study. Regarding simulations, the four LSME implementations provided similar biases on axial motion parameters, except the L&M that outperformed other methods with a minimum strain bias of -3%. LSME axial motion estimates showed good consistence with theory, namely the OF-based algorithm that in a specific instance estimated delta(yy) with no relative error on the standard deviation. With regards to lateral motion parameters, ITER(c) exhibited a minimum strain bias of -8.5% when ultrasound beam and motion mostly run parallel, whereas L&M performs strain and shear estimates with less than 23% bias independently of orientations. The in vitro vessel phantom data showed LSME delta(yy) and delta(yx) maps that were qualitatively equivalent to theory, and noisy delta(xx) and delta(xy) elastograms. In summary, the authors propose to promote the OF-based LSME as an optimal choice for further applications of NIVE, because of its reliability to compute both axial strain and shear motion parameters and because it outperformed the other implementations by a factor of 30 or more in terms of processing 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".