A Tracking Prior to Localization Workflow for Ultrasound Localization Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasound Localization Microscopy (ULM) has proven effective in resolving microvascular structures and local mean velocities at sub-diffraction-limited scales, offering high-resolution imaging capabilities. Dynamic ULM (DULM) enables the creation of angiography or velocity movies throughout cardiac cycles. Currently, these techniques rely on a Localization-and-Tracking (LAT) workflow consisting in detecting microbubbles (MB) in the frames before pairing them to generate tracks. While conventional LAT methods perform well at low concentrations, they suffer from longer acquisition times and degraded localization and tracking accuracy at higher concentrations, leading to biased angiogram reconstruction and velocity estimation. In this study, we propose a novel approach to address these challenges by reversing the current workflow. The proposed method, Tracking-and-Localization (TAL), relies on first tracking the MB and then performing localization. Through comprehensive benchmarking using both in silico and in vivo experiments and employing various metrics to quantify ULM angiography and velocity maps, we demonstrate that the TAL method consistently outperforms the reference LAT workflow. Moreover, when applied to DULM, TAL successfully extracts velocity variations along the cardiac cycle with improved repeatability. The findings of this work highlight the effectiveness of the TAL approach in overcoming the limitations of conventional LAT methods, providing enhanced ULM angiography and velocity imaging.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".