MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388462010 · doi:10.32920/24471217

Despeckling Ultrasound Images with Decorrelated Compounding in the Spatial Frequency Domain

2023· preprint· en· W4388462010 on OpenAlexafffund
Na Zhao, Donald Kondi, Vanessa Hoang, Krista Ariello, Darren A. Yuen, Eno Hysi, Yuan Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDecorrelationCompoundingSpeckle patternFrequency domainComputer scienceUltrasoundSpeckle noiseArtificial intelligenceComputer visionAcousticsMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speckle variance in ultrasound images limits the detection of low-contrast targets. Recently, a decorrelated compounding method in synthetic transmit aperture ultrasound imaging was proposed to reduce speckle variance. This paper extended the decorrelated compounding method beyond synthetic transmit aperture ultrasound imaging to any radio-frequency ultrasound images. A spatial-frequency-domain compounding method is proposed here by dividing the spectrum of ultrasound images into overlapped sub-domains to produce multiple sub-images for decorrelation and compounding. The image quality metrics, such as speckle signal-noise-ratio, contrast, contrast-noise-ratio, spatial resolutions, and lesion signal-noise-ratio, were calculated to compare the proposed method and the delay-and-sum method. The proposed method improved the contrast-noise ratio over the delay-and-sum method at the cost of spatial resolution loss. Overall, the proposed method improved lesion detectability in terms of lesion signal-noise-ratio by more than 57\% in numerical simulations and experimental studies. The proportion correct of detecting simulated low-contrast (-1 dB) lesions increased from the 67\% in the the delay-and-sum method to 95\% in the proposed method in the two-alternative forced-choice studies on human observers. Structures in the {\it in vivo} clinical image were identified more easily in the proposed method than in the delay-and-sum method.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207