MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116952242 · doi:10.1117/1.jmi.13.1.017001

Ultrasound imaging using single-element biaxial beamforming

2025· article· en· W7116952242 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathan Meulenbroek, Laura Curiel, Adam C. Waspe, Samuel Pichardo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUltrasound imagingBeamformingUltrasoundUltrasonic imagingPhase imagingImaging technique

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PurposeDynamic focusing of received ultrasound signals, or beamforming, is foundational for ultrasound imaging. Conventionally, it requires arrays of ultrasound sensors to estimate where sound came from using time-of-flight (TOF) measurements. We demonstrate passive beamforming with a single biaxial sensor and accurate passive acoustic mapping with two biaxial sensors using only direction of arrival (DOA) information.ApproachWe introduce two single-element biaxial beamforming algorithms and four biaxial image reconstruction algorithms for a two-element biaxial piezoceramic transducer array. Imaging of a hemispherical acoustic source is characterized in an acoustic scanning tank within the region −30.29 mm ≤x≤ 29.94 mm and 50.11 mm ≤z≤ 90.45 mm relative to the center of the array. Imaging performance is contrasted with delay, sum, and integrate (DSAI) and delay, multiply, sum, and integrate (DMSAI) algorithms.ResultsSingle-element biaxial beamforming can identify DOA with a median error (± interquartile range) of 0.36±0.63 deg and median full-width half-prominence of 7.3±8.6 deg. Using both array elements, DOA-only images demonstrate overall median localization error of 6.41 mm (lateral: 1.02 mm, axial: 5.85 mm, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR): 15.37) and DOA + TOF images demonstrate overall median error of 6.91 mm (lateral: 1.69 mm, axial: 6.11 mm, SNR: 18.37).ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, we provide the first demonstration of single-element beamforming using a single stationary piezoceramic and the first demonstration of passive ultrasound imaging without the use of TOF information. These results enable simpler, smaller, more cost-effective arrays for passive ultrasound 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 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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical ImagingSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207