ArticleIEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control2023
Calibrating Data Mismatches in Deep Learning-Based Quantitative Ultrasound Using Setting Transfer Functions.
Article in IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Migration of Deep Learning Models Across Ultrasound Scanners.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2025Article
- Machine-to-Machine Transfer Function in Deep Learning-Based Quantitative Ultrasound.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning (DL) can fail when there are data mismatches between training and testing data distributions. Due to its operator-dependent nature, acquisition-related data mismatches, caused by different scanner settings, can occur in ultrasound imaging. As a result, it is crucial to mitigate the effects of these mismatches to enable wider clinical adoption of DL-powered ultrasound imaging and tissue characterization. To address this challenge, we propose an inexpensive and generalizable method that involves collecting a large training set at a single setting and a small calibration set at each scanner setting. Then, the calibration set will be used to calibrate data mismatches by using a signals and systems perspective. We tested the proposed solution to classify two phantoms using an L9-4 array connected to a SonixOne scanner. To investigate generalizability of the proposed solution, we calibrated three types of data mismatches: pulse frequency mismatch, focus mismatch, and output power mismatch. Two well-known convolutional neural networks (CNNs), i.e., ResNet-50 and DenseNet-201, were trained using the ultrasound radio frequency (RF) data. To calibrate the setting mismatches, we calculated the setting transfer functions. The CNNs trained without calibration resulted in mean classification accuracies of around 52%, 84%, and 85% for pulse frequency, focus, and output power mismatches, respectively. By using the setting transfer functions, which allowed a matching of the training and testing domains, we obtained the mean accuracies of 96%, 96%, and 98%, respectively. Therefore, the incorporation of the setting transfer functions between scanner settings can provide an economical means of generalizing a DL model for specific classification tasks where scanner settings are not fixed by the operator.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.