MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200918305 · doi:10.1109/ius52206.2021.9593856

Ultrasound Domain Adaptation Using Frequency Domain Analysis

2021· preprint· en· W3200918305 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Sharifzadeh, Ali K. Z. Tehrani, Habib Benali, Hassan Rivaz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNvidia
KeywordsComputer scienceSynthetic dataFrequency domainAttenuationArtificial intelligenceSegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Envelope (radar)Sample (material)AlgorithmComputer visionRadarPhysicsOpticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common issue in exploiting simulated ultrasound data for training neural networks is the domain shift problem, where the trained models on synthetic data are not generalizable to clinical data. Recently, Fourier Domain Adaptation (FDA) has been proposed in the field of computer vision to tackle the domain shift problem by replacing the magnitude of the low-frequency spectrum of a synthetic sample (source) with a real sample (target). This method is attractive in ultrasound imaging given that two important differences between synthetic and real ultrasound data are caused by unknown values of attenuation and speed of sound (SOS) in real tissues. Attenuation leads to slow variations in the amplitude of the B-mode image, and SOS mismatch creates aberration and subsequent blurring. As such, both domain shifts cause differences in the low-frequency components of the envelope data, which are replaced in the proposed method. We demonstrate that applying the FDA method to the synthetic data, simulated by Field II, obtains an 3.5% higher Dice similarity coefficient for a breast lesion segmentation task.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207