MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7160936700 · doi:10.1121/10.0040505

High spatial resolution attenuation imaging on a breast tomography scanner based on deep learning

2025· article· en· W7160936700 on OpenAlexaff
Mingrui Liu, Zhengchang Kou, James Wiskin, Gregory Czarnota, M Oelze

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttenuationImage resolutionScannerUltrasoundIterative reconstructionTomographyBreast imagingBreast ultrasound

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attenuation imaging has been used as an independent indictor for breast cancer in ultrasound imaging. Both quantitative ultrasound (QUS) and ultrasound tomography (USCT) can be used to create attenuation images. In QUS, the spectral log difference method is most often applied on the backscattered signal, generating a low spatial resolution image. In USCT, the full wave inversion method is used to reconstruct the imaginary part of the wavenumber, which is attenuation, but suffers from being poorly conditioned, leading to a lower image quality. To overcome these issues, we propose using deep learning (DL) to reconstruct attenuation images of the breast using an ultrasound tomography scanner, i.e., QTI Breast Acoustic CT Scanner. Our U-Net neural network uses both 60-angle RF data as the input and, considering the Kramers–Kronig relations, the sound speed image as an additional input. The attenuation image is the output. The network was trained on simulated breast phantoms, and tested on simulation, physical phantoms, and in vivo breast data. The results demonstrate that our method can generate a high spatial resolution attenuation image with accurate values, and the relationship between generated attenuation and sound speed can serve as a new indicator for breast cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207