MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162518880 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2007.366

Tissue strain imaging using a wavelet transform-based peak search algorithm

2007· article· en· W2162518880 on OpenAlexaff
Hani Eskandari, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Robert Rohling

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmEstimatorWaveletSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Imaging phantomSensitivity (control systems)Wavelet transformSIGNAL (programming language)Noise (video)MathematicsCompression ratioCompression (physics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsOpticsStatisticsElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method is proposed to estimate the motion and relative local compression between two successive ultrasound RF signals under different compression states. The algorithm uses the continuous wavelet transform to locate the peaks in the RF signals. The estimated peaks in the pre- and post-compression signals are assigned to each other by a peak matching technique with the goal of minimizing the number of false matches. The method allows local shifts of the tissue to be estimated. The method has been tested in one-dimensional simulations and phantom experiments. The signal-to-noise ratio and the rms error are shown to be better than for the standard cross-correlation method (CC). The new estimator remains unbiased for up to 10% strain which is a larger range than that of CC. The maximum signal-to-noise ratio is 3 times as high as that of the CC method, showing higher sensitivity as well. The method is computationally efficient, achieving 0.7 msec/RF line on a standard personal computer.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207