MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310502046 · doi:10.1109/ius54386.2022.9957900

Analytic Optimization-Based Microbubble Tracking in Ultrasound Super-Resolution Microscopy

2022· article· en· W4310502046 on OpenAlexafffund
Md Ashikuzzaman, Brandon Helfield, Hassan Rivaz

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrobubblesTracking (education)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceUltrasoundPoint spread functionContrast-enhanced ultrasoundComputer visionMicroscopyImage resolutionBubbleMedical ultrasoundPosition (finance)AlgorithmOpticsPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasound localization microscopy (ULM) refers to a promising medical imaging modality that systematically leverages the advantages of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to surpass the diffraction barrier and delineate the microvascular map. Localization and tracking of microbubbles (MBs), two significant steps of ULM, facilitate generating the vascular map and the velocity distribution, respectively. Herein, we propose a novel MB tracking technique considering temporal pairing as a bubble-set registration problem. Iterative registration is performed between the bubble sets in two consecutive time instants by analytically optimizing a cost function that takes position and point-spread function (PSF) similarities as well as physically plausible levels of bubbles' movement into account. Furthermore, we infer MBs' parity in a fuzzy manner instead of binary. The proposed technique performs well in validation experiments with two synthetic and two in vivo datasets provided by the Ultrasound Lo-calisation and TRacking Algorithms for Super Resolution (ULTRA-SR) Challenge.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS)Same topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207