MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138256807 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/abf1b6

Sparse channel sampling for ultrasound localization microscopy (SPARSE-ULM)

2021· article· en· W3138256807 on OpenAlexafffund
Erwan Hardy, Jonathan Porée, Hatim Belgharbi, Chloé Bourquin, Frédéric Lesage, Jean Provost

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstitutePolytechnique Montréal
FundersInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsImaging phantomComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Artificial intelligenceFrame rateSoftwareMicrobubblesComputer visionBiomedical engineeringUltrasoundAlgorithmPhysicsOpticsAcousticsMedicineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ultrasound localization microscopy (ULM) has recently enabled the mapping of the cerebral vasculature in vivo with a resolution ten times smaller than the wavelength used, down to ten microns. However, with frame rates up to 20000 frames per second, this method requires large amount of data to be acquired, transmitted, stored, and processed. The transfer rate is, as of today, one of the main limiting factors of this technology. Herein, we introduce a novel reconstruction framework to decrease this quantity of data to be acquired and the complexity of the required hardware by randomly subsampling the channels of a linear probe. Method performance evaluation as well as parameters optimization were conducted in silico using the SIMUS simulation software in an anatomically realistic phantom and then compared to in vivo acquisitions in a rat brain after craniotomy. Results show that reducing the number of active elements deteriorates the signal-to-noise ratio and could lead to false microbubbles detections but has limited effect on localization accuracy. In simulation, the false positive rate on microbubble detection deteriorates from 3.7% for 128 channels in receive and 7 steered angles to 11% for 16 channels and 7 angles. The average localization accuracy ranges from 10.6 μ m and 9.93 μ m for 16 channels/3 angles and 128 channels/13 angles respectively. These results suggest that a compromise can be found between the number of channels and the quality of the reconstructed vascular network and demonstrate feasibility of performing ULM with a reduced number of channels in receive, paving the way for low-cost devices enabling high-resolution vascular mapping.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207