MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389283174 · doi:10.32920/24471235.v1

A Forward Model for Estimating Phase Aberration in Ultrasound Imaging

2023· preprint· en· W4389283174 on OpenAlexafffund
Keyan Sheppard, Yuan Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpherical aberrationPhase (matter)OpticsFocus (optics)Term (time)Quadratic equationSensitivity (control systems)Contrast transfer functionImaging phantomConstant (computer programming)Optical aberrationLinear phasePhysicsMathematicsWavefrontComputer scienceGeometryElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phase aberration in ultrasound images is caused by inaccurate information in the sound speed distribution in the medium and can result in image distortion, such as shape change and position shifting of the imaged objects. Various methods, including cross-correlation-based methods, have been applied to the distorted images to estimate phase aberration. In this paper, we first propose that the position shifting induced by the phase aberration causes the estimated phase aberration to be inaccurate. Then, we propose an equation relating the estimated phase aberration to the true one and the equations to predict position shifting. Finally, we present a forward model for estimating phase aberration. Considering phase aberration as a function of the array element position, the theory shows that both the constant term and linear term of the true phase aberration will be canceled in the estimated phase aberration as they result solely in predictable position shifting. Field II simulations and data from tissue-mimicking phantom were used to validate the proposed theory. The theory was also applied to improve the estimation of the initial delay of ultrasound probes in both Field II simulations and experimental phantom study. Other potential applications of the proposed theory were also discussed.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.306 · 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