Ultrasound segmentation using U-Net: learning from simulated data and testing on real data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Segmentation of ultrasound images is an essential task in both diagnosis and image-guided interventions given the ease-of-use and low cost of this imaging modality. As manual segmentation is tedious and time consuming, a growing body of research has focused on the development of automatic segmentation algorithms. Deep learning algorithms have shown remarkable achievements in this regard; however, they need large training datasets. Unfortunately, preparing large labeled datasets in ultrasound images is prohibitively difficult. Therefore, in this study, we propose the use of simulated ultrasound (US) images for training the U-Net deep learning segmentation architecture and test on tissue-mimicking phantom data collected by an ultrasound machine. We demonstrate that the trained architecture on the simulated data is transferrable to real data, and therefore, simulated data can be considered as an alternative training dataset when real datasets are not available. The second contribution of this paper is that we train our U-Net network on envelope and B-mode images of the simulated dataset, and test the trained network on real envelope and B-mode images of phantom, respectively. We show that test results are superior for the envelope data compared to B-mode image.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".