MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551523173 · doi:10.1121/1.4969393

High frame-rate visualization of blood flow with ultrasound contrast agents

2016· article· en· W2551523173 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Bruce, Alex Hannah, Charles Tremblay‐Darveau, Peter N. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobubblesFrame rateComputer scienceVisualizationBlood flowContrast (vision)AcousticsUltrasoundDoppler effectNonlinear systemLeverage (statistics)Flow (mathematics)Contrast-enhanced ultrasoundFlow visualizationComputer visionArtificial intelligencePhysicsRadiologyMedicineMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent breakthroughs in diagnostic ultrasound system architectures have enabled new high frame rate (kHz) capabilities, which are opening new opportunities in blood flow imaging. In order to leverage these increases in temporal resolution broader or unfocused beams are employed. The combination high frame and less focused beams with ultrasound contrast agents introduces both new opportunities and trade-offs. One new opportunity is the ability to combine Doppler based processing to visualize both lower velocity blood flow in the microcirculation and higher velocity flow in larger vasculature not possible with conventional techniques. This can be accomplished by combining nonlinear pulsing sequences to separate microbubble and tissue signals with these less focused beams to separate different microbubble flow velocities. The use of less focused beams to image nonlinear echoes from microbubbles distributes ultrasound energy to microbubbles in temporally and spatially different ways. This work explores the compromises of using these less focused beams to visualize moving microbubbles at higher temporal resolutions. The focus will be on the practical challenges of generating nonlinear signals while balancing microbubble disruption and current system reconstruction capabilities. Both in-vitro and in-vivo results will be presented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207