MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403604484 · doi:10.3390/sym16101402

Photoacoustic Waveform Design for Optimal Parameter Estimation Based on Maximum Mutual Information

2024· article· en· W4403604484 on OpenAlexafffund
Zuwen Sun, Natalie Baddour

Bibliographic record

VenueSymmetry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWaveformFourier transformHeuristicComputer scienceAlgorithmAmplitudeSpectral densityInverse problemSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Noise (video)Frequency domainMathematical optimizationMathematicsOpticsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceRadarTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Waveform design is a potentially significant approach to improve the performance of an imaging or detection system. Photoacoustic imaging is a rapidly developing field in recent years; however, photoacoustic waveform design has not been extensively investigated. This paper considers the problem of photoacoustic waveform design for parameter estimation under constraints on input energy. The use of information theory is exploited to formulate and solve this optimal waveform design problem. The approach yields the optimal waveform power spectral density. Direct inverse Fourier transform of the optimal waveform frequency spectrum amplitude is proposed to obtain a real waveform in the time domain. Absorbers are assumed to be stochastic absorber ensembles with uncertain duration and location parameters. Simulation results show the relationship between absorber parameter distribution and the characteristics of optimal waveforms. Comparison of optimal waveforms for estimation, optimal waveforms for detection (signal-to-noise ratio) and other commonly used waveforms are also discussed. The symmetry properties of the forward and inverse Fourier Transforms are used to analyze the time and frequency properties and provide a heuristic view of how different goals affect the choice of waveform.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymmetrySame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207