MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancement of photoacoustic tomography in the tissue with speed-of-sound variance using ultrasound computed tomography

2015· article· en· W2415262739 on OpenAlexaff
Renxiang Cheng, Chao Tao, Xiaojun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Physics B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersSpecialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of ChinaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputed tomographyTomographySpeed of soundUltrasoundPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineAcousticsMaterials scienceSound (geography)Variance (accounting)RadiologyMedicineOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The speed-of-sound variance will decrease the imaging quality of photoacoustic tomography in acoustically inhomogeneous tissue. In this study, ultrasound computed tomography is combined with photoacoustic tomography to enhance the photoacoustic tomography in this situation. The speed-of-sound information is recovered by ultrasound computed tomography. Then, an improved delay-and-sum method is used to reconstruct the image from the photoacoustic signals. The simulation results validate that the proposed method can obtain a better photoacoustic tomography than the conventional method when the speed-of-sound variance is increased. In addition, the influences of the speed-of-sound variance and the fan-angle on the image quality are quantitatively explored to optimize the image scheme. The proposed method has a good performance even when the speed-of-sound variance reaches 14.2%. Furthermore, an optimized fan angle is revealed, which can keep the good image quality with a low cost of hardware. This study has a potential value in extending the biomedical application of photoacoustic tomography.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Physics BSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207