MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996440982 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2019.8925604

A Spatially Weighted Regularization Method for Attenuation Coefficient Estimation

2019· article· en· W2996440982 on OpenAlexaff
Farah Deeba, Ricky Hu, Jefferson Terry, D. Pugash, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Chantal Mayer, Septimiu E. Salcudean, Robert Rohling

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)AttenuationImaging phantomTotal variation denoisingAttenuation coefficientAccuracy and precisionComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceNoise reductionPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing methods for measuring the ultrasonic attenuation coefficient estimate (ACE) fail to take into account the effect of tissue heterogeneity. We propose a total variation (TV) regularization based method, where the local regularization will be modulated as a function of envelope signal-to-noise-ratio deviation, an indicator of tissue heterogeneity. We evaluate our approach using three physical phantoms with different configurations. We also demonstrate the application of the method for placenta ex vivo. The proposed method results in significant improvement in ACE measurement compared to the reference phantom method for all the experiments. Specifically, the method shows promising results in the presence of heterogeneity, exceeding the performance of both reference phantom and unweighted total variation regularization in terms of accuracy, precision and resolution-precision trade-off.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207