MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of Particle Swarm Optimization and Genetic Algorithm for Ultrasound Estimation of Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Using Matching Pursuit

2022· article· en· W4293039067 on OpenAlexafffund
Khoa Tran, Sreeraman Rajan, Yuu Ono

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationAlgorithmUltrasoundMatching pursuitIntima-media thicknessCommon carotid arteryGenetic algorithmComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceCarotid arteriesMathematical optimizationMedicineRadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are one of the most dominant causes of death worldwide. Consequently, much attention has been given to CVD prevention by monitoring CVD risk factors. The intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid artery is widely recognized as a reliable indicator for CDV risk and can be monitored non-invasively using ultrasound. To reduce IMT estimation variability, many automatic algorithms that estimate IMT using B-mode ultrasound images have been proposed. The performance of B-mode image-based algorithms are often limited by the image resolution. M-mode or A-mode algorithms may be an alternative to B-mode approaches for lower resolution ultrasound data. Recently, matching pursuit (MP) signal decomposition with particle swarm optimization (PSO) was investigated for extracting the arterial tissue interface echoes used for IMT estimation using A-mode ultrasound signals. In this work, PSO was compared to the genetic algorithm (GA) for IMT estimation using MP. Both methods were evaluated on the frequency at which the arterial tissue interface echoes used for IMT estimation were successfully extracted, the time and number of computations required to decompose the ultrasound signals, and the variability in IMT estimates. Using the same search constraints and control parameters for both methods, the results showed that the MP algorithm with PSO was faster and required less computations than the one with the GA, but the GA resulted in more successful IMT estimates than PSO. No significant difference in IMT estimation variability was observed.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA)Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207