A Unified Framework Combining Doppler-Based Motion Compensation, Harmonic Imaging, and Angular Coherence for High-Quality B-Mode in Ultrafast Echocardiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various methods have been proposed to enhance image quality in ultrafast ultrasound. Coherent compounding can improve image quality using multiple steered diverging transmits when motion occurring between transmits is corrected for. Harmonic imaging, a standard technique in conventional focused echocardiography, has been adapted for ultrafast imaging, reducing clutter. Coherence-based approaches have also been shown to increase contrast in clinical settings by enhancing signals from coherent echoes and reducing clutter. Herein, we introduce a simple, unified framework that combines motion-correction, harmonic imaging, and angular-coherence, showing for the first time that their benefits can be combined in real-time. Validation was conducted through in vitro testing on a spinning disk model and in vivo on 4 volunteers. In vitro results confirmed the unified framework capability to achieve high contrast in large-motion contexts up to 17 cm/s. In vivo testing highlighted proficiency in generating images of high quality during low and high tissue velocity phases of the cardiac cycle. Specifically, during ventricular filling, the unified framework increased the gCNR from 0.47 to 0.87 when compared against coherent compounding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".