MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160888227 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2015.0492

Adaptive learning of tissue reflectivity statistics and its application to deconvolution of medical ultrasound scans

2015· article· en· W2160888227 on OpenAlexafffund
Oleg Michailovich, Yogesh Rathi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDeconvolutionComputer scienceSpecular reflectionBlind deconvolutionReflectivityRegularization (linguistics)AlgorithmGaussianPrior probabilityArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image deconvolution is an important post-processing methodology allowing a substantial improvement it terms of both the resolution and contrast of medical ultrasound scans. Unfortunately, the intrinsic bandlimitedness of ultrasound scanners renders the problem of image deconvolution ill-posed, and, as a result, the latter rarely admits a stable and unique solution, unless properly regularized. To be successful, the regularization needs to properly reflect the actual reflectivity properties of insonified tissues. Unfortunately, the inherent complexity of biological tissues makes it extremely difficult (if at all possible) to justify the use of a single statistical model for the description of their acoustic reflectivity structure. Thus, for example, Gaussian and Laplacian statistical priors can provide adequate description of the characteristics of diffusive scattering and specular reflection, respectively, while yielding inaccurate estimates when either of the two is used exclusively for concurrent description of both reflectively types. To overcome this difficulty, we propose to use a concomitant scale estimation framework, which allows one to learn the parameters of a prior model along with its associated reflectivity properties directly from the data. The proposed method is formulated in the form of a convex optimization problem that admits a unique and efficiently computable solution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207