MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790167383 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2018.2807699

Compressibility and Density Weighting for Ultrasound Scattering Tomography

2018· article· en· W2790167383 on OpenAlexafffund
Quinn Barber, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCompressibilityWeightingTomographyScatteringAcousticsUltrasoundPhysicsMaterials scienceOpticsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel reconstruction technique based on delay-and-sum ultrasound tomography algorithms is introduced. This reconstruction technique enables ultrasound tomographic systems to produce compressibility- and density-weighted images (D-WI) for spherically symmetric ultrasound scatterers. The efficacy of this reconstruction technique was demonstrated with simulation and phantom experiments. Separation between a dense wire target and a compressible thread target within a phantom was quantified, showing an increased signal of the wire target for D-WIs. The suppression of background scatter in D-WIs was also quantified. Resolution was calculated for these reconstruction techniques, exemplifying the half-wavelength diffraction-limited resolution capabilities of this ultrasound scattering tomography system. The proposed technique offers a enhanced minimum-detectable density-contrast sensitivity compared to traditional B-scan imaging for a 100- target. This enhanced detectability is expected to prove advantageous for microcalcification imaging.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207