High-Frame-Rate Echocardiography Using Coherent Compounding With Doppler-Based Motion-Compensation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-frame-rate ultrasonography based on coherent compounding of unfocused beams can potentially transform the assessment of cardiac function. As it requires successive waves to be combined coherently, this approach is sensitive to high-velocity tissue motion. We investigated coherent compounding of tilted diverging waves, emitted from a 2.5 MHz clinical phased array transducer. To cope with high myocardial velocities, a triangle transmit sequence of diverging waves is proposed, combined with tissue Doppler imaging to perform motion compensation (MoCo). The compound sequence with integrated MoCo was adjusted from simulations and was tested in vitro and in vivo. Realistic myocardial velocities were analyzed in an in vitro spinning disk with anechoic cysts. While a 8 dB decrease (no motion versus high motion) was observed without MoCo, the contrast-to-noise ratio of the cysts was preserved with the MoCo approach. With this method, we could provide high-quality in vivo B-mode cardiac images with tissue Doppler at 250 frames per second. Although the septum and the anterior mitral leaflet were poorly apparent without MoCo, they became well perceptible and well contrasted with MoCo. The septal and lateral mitral annulus velocities determined by tissue Doppler were concordant with those measured by pulsed-wave Doppler with a clinical scanner (r(2)=0.7,y=0.9 x+0.5,N=60) . To conclude, high-contrast echo cardiographic B-mode and tissue Doppler images can be obtained with diverging beams when motion compensation is integrated in the coherent compounding process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".