Literature DB >> 8675835

Error bounds on ultrasonic scatterer size estimates.

P Chaturvedi1, M F Insana.   

Abstract

Precision errors that occur in estimating the average scatterer size from pulse-echo ultrasound waveforms are examined in detail. The method-independent lower bound on estimation error is found from the Cramér-Rao inequality for comparison with the predicted error for the measurement technique currently used to estimate scatterer sizes in soft biological tissues. The probability density function for the estimate is also derived. From these statistical analyses, strategies for designing experiments that minimize the error are discussed. It is shown that compared with biological variability, measurement errors in scatterer size estimates are relatively large. Consequently, there is reason to continue searching for more efficient estimators. Although the analysis and results are derived for Gaussian correlation models that have been used to study the function and structure of kidneys, generalization to include correlation models for other tissues is straightforward.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8675835     DOI: 10.1121/1.415958

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  12 in total

1.  Quantitative ultrasound in cancer imaging.

Authors:  Ernest J Feleppa; Jonathan Mamou; Christopher R Porter; Junji Machi
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.929

2.  On the estimation of backscatter coefficients using single-element focused transducers.

Authors:  Roberto J Lavarello; Goutam Ghoshal; Michael L Oelze
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Lower Bound on Estimation Variance of the Ultrasonic Attenuation Coefficient Using the Spectral-Difference Reference-phantom Method.

Authors:  Kayvan Samimi; Tomy Varghese
Journal:  Ultrason Imaging       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 1.578

4.  Optimization of the algorithms for estimating the ultrasonic attenuation along the propagation path.

Authors:  Yassin Labyed; Timothy A Bigelow
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 2.890

5.  Estimation of Backscatter Coefficients Using an In Situ Calibration Source.

Authors:  Trong N Nguyen; Alex J Tam; Minh N Do; Michael L Oelze
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 2.725

6.  Limitations on estimation of effective scatterer diameters.

Authors:  Yang Zhu; Aiguo Han; William D O'Brien; Michael L Oelze; Michael F Insana
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Optimum Diffraction-Corrected Frequency-Shift Estimator of the Ultrasonic Attenuation Coefficient.

Authors:  Kayvan Samimi; Tomy Varghese
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 2.725

8.  Quantitative ultrasound and apoptotic death in the neonatal primate brain.

Authors:  Ivan M Rosado-Mendez; Kevin K Noguchi; Laura Castañeda-Martinez; George Kirvassilis; Sophie H Wang; Francesca Manzella; Brant S Swiney; Kobe Masuoka; Saverio Capuano; Kevin G Brunner; Kristin Crosno; Quinton W Guerrero; Hayley Whitson; Ansgar Brambrink; Heather S Simmons; Andres F Mejia; James A Zagzebski; Timothy J Hall; Chrysanthy Ikonomidou
Journal:  Neurobiol Dis       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 5.996

9.  Entropy vs. Energy Waveform Processing: A Comparison Based on the Heat Equation.

Authors:  Michael S Hughes; John E McCarthy; Paul J Bruillard; Jon N Marsh; Samuel A Wickline
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2015-05-25       Impact factor: 2.524

Review 10.  Review of Quantitative Ultrasound: Envelope Statistics and Backscatter Coefficient Imaging and Contributions to Diagnostic Ultrasound.

Authors:  Michael L Oelze; Jonathan Mamou
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 2.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.