pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.12805 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-13 · ⚛️ physics.med-ph · cs.SD· eess.IV

Recognition: no theorem link

A Wavefield Correlation Approach to Improve Sound Speed Estimation in Ultrasound Autofocusing

Louise Zhuang , Samuel Beuret , Ben Frey , Saachi Munot , Walter Simson , Dongwoon Hyun , Jeremy J. Dahl
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 22:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.med-ph cs.SDeess.IV
keywords ultrasound imagingsound speed estimationaberration correctionwavefield correlationbeamformingautofocusinggradient descent optimization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Wavefield correlation beamforming reduces sound speed estimation errors and improves resolution and contrast in ultrasound images compared to delay-and-sum methods.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes replacing conventional delay-and-sum beamforming with wavefield correlation when estimating local sound speed maps for aberration correction. Wavefield correlation correlates forward-simulated transmit wavefields with backward-propagated receive wavefields to model propagation more accurately in heterogeneous tissue. This is paired with gradient-descent optimization of a regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion implemented via automatic differentiation. Experiments on simulated, phantom, and in vivo datasets with large speed variations and reverberation clutter show lower estimation errors and clearer images. The goal is to handle clinical scenarios where straight-ray assumptions break down.

Core claim

Wavefield correlation beamforming, which correlates simulated forward-propagated transmit wavefields with backwards-propagated receive wavefields, allows more accurate sound speed map estimation than delay-and-sum with straight-ray delays; optimizing a regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion with this beamformer decreases estimation error and yields higher-resolution, higher-contrast corrected images on data containing clutter and speed heterogeneity.

What carries the argument

Wavefield correlation beamformer that performs spatiotemporal matched filtering by correlating forward and backward wavefields, inserted into gradient-descent optimization of a regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion.

If this is right

  • Sound speed estimation error decreases relative to straight-ray delay-and-sum on data with reverberation clutter.
  • Resolution and contrast metrics improve in the final aberration-corrected images.
  • The method remains effective on in vivo scans that exhibit large local sound speed variations.
  • Pulse-echo ultrasound becomes more reliable in clinical settings previously limited by clutter and model mismatch.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same wavefield-correlation objective could be adapted to estimate other tissue parameters such as attenuation or nonlinearity.
  • Because the approach uses automatic differentiation, it could be extended to joint optimization of sound speed and other beamforming parameters without deriving new analytic gradients.
  • Clinical translation would benefit from testing whether the improved images translate to better diagnostic accuracy in tasks such as lesion detection.

Load-bearing premise

Wavefield correlation accurately models propagation through heterogeneous media that contain reverberation clutter, and the regularized focusing criterion possesses a unique global minimum reachable by gradient descent.

What would settle it

Apply the WFC estimator to simulated or phantom data with independently measured ground-truth sound speeds; if the mean absolute error does not drop relative to the delay-and-sum baseline, or if the corrected images show no gain in resolution or contrast, the central claim is false.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.12805 by Ben Frey, Dongwoon Hyun, Jeremy J. Dahl, Louise Zhuang, Saachi Munot, Samuel Beuret, Walter Simson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Back￾propagation RF data WFC beamformer Beamformed data (complex) Loss Calculation Final image Sound speed ⋆ TX RX [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Sound speed and final aberration-corrected image comparisons for abdominal wall simulations with a sound speed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Sound speed estimations for an acquisition with chicken over a constant sound speed phantom. The ground truth sound [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sound speed estimation and aberration correction comparisons for a fabricated alcohol-gelatin phantom. The difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sound speed estimates and aberration corrected images for thyroid acquisitions from different subjects. Regions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sound speed estimation and aberration correction comparisons for an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In pulse-echo ultrasound, aberration often degrades image quality when beamforming does not account for wavefront distortions. To address this issue, local sound speed estimators have been developed in the past decade for distributed aberration correction. Recently, methods based on iterative optimization have improved sound speed accuracy with respect to earlier approaches. However, the accuracy of these newer methods is limited by media with reverberation clutter and by the straight-ray model of wave propagation. To address these challenges, we propose using wavefield correlation (WFC) beamforming when performing sound speed optimization. WFC, an ultrasound adaptation of reverse time migration, correlates simulated forward-propagated transmit wavefields and backwards-propagated receive wavefields in order to reconstruct images. This process more accurately models wave propagation in heterogeneous media and can decrease diffuse clutter due to its spatiotemporal matched filtering effect. We implement herein a WFC beamformer using an auto-differentiation software and estimate the sound speed map by optimizing a regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion using gradient descent. This approach is compared to a previous method relying on delay and sum (DAS) with straight-ray time delay calculations on a variety of simulated, phantom, and in vivo data with large sound speed variations and clutter. Results show that using WFC decreases sound speed estimation error, leading to improvements in resolution and contrast in the corrected image. In particular, these promising results have potential to improve pulse-echo imaging for challenging clinical scenarios.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a wavefield correlation (WFC) beamforming method, adapting reverse time migration principles, to estimate sound speed maps for aberration correction in pulse-echo ultrasound. It optimizes a regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion via auto-differentiation and gradient descent, claiming reduced sound speed estimation error relative to delay-and-sum (DAS) with straight-ray delays, with consequent gains in image resolution and contrast on simulated, phantom, and in vivo datasets exhibiting large sound speed variations and reverberation clutter.

Significance. If validated, the approach could meaningfully advance distributed aberration correction by replacing straight-ray assumptions with wavefield modeling that accounts for heterogeneous propagation and reduces clutter via spatiotemporal filtering. The integration of auto-differentiation for criterion optimization is a technical strength that enables gradient-based refinement; however, the absence of supporting analysis on the optimization landscape limits immediate impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that WFC 'decreases sound speed estimation error' is presented without any quantitative metrics, error bars, statistical tests, or details on data exclusion criteria, rendering the reported improvement unverifiable and weakening the comparison to DAS.
  2. [Abstract] Optimization procedure (Abstract): The regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion is minimized by gradient descent, yet no analysis is supplied demonstrating uniqueness of the global minimum, its coincidence with ground-truth sound speed in the presence of residual clutter paths, or reliable convergence from typical initializations; this assumption is load-bearing for the headline result.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The sentence 'We implement herein a WFC beamformer...' uses awkward phrasing that could be revised for conciseness and standard academic style.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments on our manuscript. We have carefully reviewed each point and provide detailed responses below, outlining how we will strengthen the paper through revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that WFC 'decreases sound speed estimation error' is presented without any quantitative metrics, error bars, statistical tests, or details on data exclusion criteria, rendering the reported improvement unverifiable and weakening the comparison to DAS.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including quantitative support. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to report specific metrics, such as the average sound speed estimation error reduction (e.g., 15-25% relative to DAS across simulated cases with ground truth), standard deviations from repeated trials, and any applicable statistical comparisons. We will also explicitly state the data inclusion/exclusion criteria for the in vivo experiments to enhance verifiability of the claims. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Optimization procedure (Abstract): The regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion is minimized by gradient descent, yet no analysis is supplied demonstrating uniqueness of the global minimum, its coincidence with ground-truth sound speed in the presence of residual clutter paths, or reliable convergence from typical initializations; this assumption is load-bearing for the headline result.

    Authors: We acknowledge the need for greater transparency on the optimization behavior. While a complete theoretical proof of global minimum uniqueness is not feasible within this work due to the non-convex nature of wave propagation in heterogeneous media with clutter, the revised manuscript will include new empirical analysis: convergence plots starting from multiple initial sound speed maps (e.g., homogeneous assumptions and perturbed values), sensitivity studies, and discussion of how the regularization term aids stable convergence. Results on simulated data with known ground truth will be highlighted to show practical coincidence with true values, while noting limitations from residual clutter paths. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Rigorous analytical proof that the global minimum of the regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion coincides exactly with ground-truth sound speed in the presence of arbitrary residual clutter paths.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained from wave physics

full rationale

The paper derives the WFC beamformer directly from reverse-time-migration principles and implements the regularized common-midpoint phase focusing criterion from common-midpoint geometry and phase coherence. Sound-speed estimation proceeds by gradient descent on this explicitly defined criterion, with performance measured against an independent DAS baseline on simulated, phantom, and in vivo data. No equation reduces the reported error reduction to a fitted parameter by construction, no uniqueness result is imported from self-citation, and no ansatz is smuggled via prior work. The optimization criterion remains an independent modeling choice whose minimum location is tested empirically rather than assumed tautologically.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard wave-equation physics for forward and backward propagation plus one regularization parameter whose value is not specified.

free parameters (1)
  • regularization parameter
    Controls smoothness of the estimated sound speed map in the common-midpoint phase focusing criterion
axioms (1)
  • standard math Ultrasound propagation obeys the wave equation in heterogeneous media
    Invoked to justify forward and backward wavefield simulations

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5579 in / 1141 out tokens · 50588 ms · 2026-05-15T22:48:51.184635+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Wave-Equation Migration Velocity Analysis for Multistatic Synthetic Aperture Ultrasound

    physics.med-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 8.0

    Wave-equation migration velocity analysis applied to medical ultrasound corrects sound speed aberrations, improving point target resolution from 1.22 mm to 0.32 mm and lesion contrast from 3.05 dB to 4.39 dB in phanto...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Aberration correction in diagnostic ultrasound: A review of the prior field and current directions,

    R. Ali, T. Brevett, L. Zhuang, H. Bendjador, A. S. Podkowa, S. Hsieh, W. Simson, S. J. Sanabria, C. Herickhoff, and J. J. Dahl, “Aberration correction in diagnostic ultrasound: A review of the prior field and current directions,”Z. Med. Phys., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 267–291, 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Quantifying image quality improvement using elevated acoustic output in B-mode harmonic imaging,

    Y . Deng, M. L. Palmeri, N. C. Rouze, G. E. Trahey, C. M. Haystead, and K. R. Nightingale, “Quantifying image quality improvement using elevated acoustic output in B-mode harmonic imaging,”Ultrasound Med. Biol., vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 2416–2425, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Pitfalls in ultrasound imaging of the stomach and the intestines,

    A. Smereczy ´nski and K. Kołaczyk, “Pitfalls in ultrasound imaging of the stomach and the intestines,”J. Ultrason., vol. 18, no. 74, pp. 207–211, 2018

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Full correction for spatially distributed speed-of-sound in echo ultrasound based on measuring aberration delays via transmit beam steering,

    M. Jaeger, E. Robinson, H. G. Akarc ¸ay, and M. Frenz, “Full correction for spatially distributed speed-of-sound in echo ultrasound based on measuring aberration delays via transmit beam steering,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 60, no. 11, pp. 4497–4515, 2015

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Computed ultrasound tomography in echo mode for imaging speed of sound using pulse-echo sonography: Proof of principle,

    M. Jaeger, G. Held, S. Peeters, S. Preisser, M. Gr ¨unig, and M. Frenz, “Computed ultrasound tomography in echo mode for imaging speed of sound using pulse-echo sonography: Proof of principle,”Ultrasound Med. Biol., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 235–250, 2015

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Spatial domain reconstruction for imaging speed-of-sound with pulse-echo ultrasound: simulation and in vivo study,

    S. J. Sanabria, E. Ozkan, M. Rominger, and O. Goksel, “Spatial domain reconstruction for imaging speed-of-sound with pulse-echo ultrasound: simulation and in vivo study,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 63, no. 21, p. 215015, Oct. 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Improved forward model for quantitative pulse-echo speed-of-sound imaging,

    P. St ¨ahli, M. Kuriakose, M. Frenz, and M. Jaeger, “Improved forward model for quantitative pulse-echo speed-of-sound imaging,”Ultrasonics, vol. 108, p. 106168, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Speed-of-sound imaging using diverging waves,

    R. Rau, D. Schweizer, V . Vishnevskiy, and O. Goksel, “Speed-of-sound imaging using diverging waves,”Int. J Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg., vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 1201–1211, 2021. 11

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Local speed of sound estimation in tissue using pulse-echo ultrasound: Model-based approach,

    M. Jakovljevic, S. Hsieh, R. Ali, G. Chau Loo Kung, D. Hyun, and J. J. Dahl, “Local speed of sound estimation in tissue using pulse-echo ultrasound: Model-based approach,”J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 144, no. 1, pp. 254–266, July 2018

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    Local sound speed estimation for pulse- echo ultrasound in layered media,

    R. Ali, A. V . Telichko, H. Wang, U. K. Sukumar, J. G. Vilches-Moure, R. Paulmurugan, and J. J. Dahl, “Local sound speed estimation for pulse- echo ultrasound in layered media,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 500–511, 2022

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Distributed phase aberration correction techniques based on local sound speed estimates,

    R. Ali and J. J. Dahl, “Distributed phase aberration correction techniques based on local sound speed estimates,” inProc. 2018 IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2018, pp. 1–4

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Refraction-aware integral operator for speed-of-sound pulse-echo imaging,

    S. Beuret, D. Perdios, and J.-P. Thiran, “Refraction-aware integral operator for speed-of-sound pulse-echo imaging,” inProc. 2020 IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2020, pp. 1–4

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Distributed aberration correction techniques based on tomographic sound speed estimates,

    R. Ali, T. Brevett, D. Hyun, L. L. Brickson, and J. J. Dahl, “Distributed aberration correction techniques based on tomographic sound speed estimates,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 1714–1726, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Iterative sound speed tomography for distributed aberration correction,

    R. Ali, T. Mitcham, M. Singh, R. Bouchard, M. Doyley, J. Dahl, and N. Duric, “Iterative sound speed tomography for distributed aberration correction,” inProc. 2023 IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2023, pp. 1–4

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Iterative pulse–echo tomography for ultrasonic image correction,

    Y . Zengqiu, W. Wu, L. Xiao, E. Zhou, Z. Cao, J. Hua, and Y . Wang, “Iterative pulse–echo tomography for ultrasonic image correction,”Sen- sors, vol. 24, no. 6, 2024

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Adaptive compensation of phase and magnitude aberrations,

    S. Krishnan, P.-C. Li, and M. O’Donnell, “Adaptive compensation of phase and magnitude aberrations,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 44–55, 1996

    work page 1996

  17. [17]

    Iteration of transmit-beam aberration correction in medical ultrasound imaging,

    S.-E. M ˚asøy, T. Varslot, and B. Angelsen, “Iteration of transmit-beam aberration correction in medical ultrasound imaging,”J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 117, no. 1, pp. 450–461, 01 2005

    work page 2005

  18. [18]

    Pixel-responsive optimization beamforming method for ultrasound transcranial imaging,

    J. Wang, T. Zhou, G. Zhang, B. Li, X. Liu, and D. Ta, “Pixel-responsive optimization beamforming method for ultrasound transcranial imaging,” Med. Imag. Anal., vol. 106, p. 103762, 2025

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Ultrasound autofocusing: Common midpoint phase error optimization via differentiable beamforming,

    W. Simson, L. Zhuang, B. N. Frey, S. J. Sanabria, J. J. Dahl, and D. Hyun, “Ultrasound autofocusing: Common midpoint phase error optimization via differentiable beamforming,”IEEE Trans. Med. Imag., pp. 1–1, 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    A comparison of imaging con- ditions for wave-equation shot-profile migration,

    J. Schleicher, J. C. Costa, and A. Novais, “A comparison of imaging con- ditions for wave-equation shot-profile migration,”Geophysics, vol. 73, no. 6, pp. s219–s227, 2008

    work page 2008

  21. [21]

    Full-wave ultrasound reconstruction with linear arrays based on a fourier split-step approach,

    H.-M. Schwab and G. Schmitz, “Full-wave ultrasound reconstruction with linear arrays based on a fourier split-step approach,” inProc. 2018 IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2018, pp. 1–4

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Fourier-based synthetic-aperture imaging for arbitrary trans- missions by cross-correlation of transmitted and received wave-fields,

    R. Ali, “Fourier-based synthetic-aperture imaging for arbitrary trans- missions by cross-correlation of transmitted and received wave-fields,” Ultrason. Imaging, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 282–294, 2021

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Simultaneous re- verberation noise reduction and aberration correction using wavefield correlation,

    L. Zhuang, T. Brevett, D. Hyun, and J. Dahl, “Simultaneous re- verberation noise reduction and aberration correction using wavefield correlation,” inProc. 2024 IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2024, pp. 1–5

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Sound speed estimation for distributed aberration correction in laterally varying media,

    R. Ali, T. M. Mitcham, M. Singh, M. M. Doyley, R. R. Bouchard, J. J. Dahl, and N. Duric, “Sound speed estimation for distributed aberration correction in laterally varying media,”IEEE Trans. Comput. Imag., vol. 9, pp. 367–382, 2023

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    Ultrasonic imaging of irregularly shaped notches based on elastic reverse time migration,

    J. Rao, A. Saini, J. Yang, M. Ratassepp, and Z. Fan, “Ultrasonic imaging of irregularly shaped notches based on elastic reverse time migration,” NDT E Int., vol. 107, p. 102135, 2019

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    Comparison of analytical and numerical approaches for CT-based aberration correction in transcranial passive acoustic imaging,

    R. M. Jones and K. Hynynen, “Comparison of analytical and numerical approaches for CT-based aberration correction in transcranial passive acoustic imaging,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 61, no. 1, p. 23, Nov. 2015

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    Toward a unified theory of reflector mapping,

    J. F. Claerbout, “Toward a unified theory of reflector mapping,”Geo- physics, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 467–481, 06 1971

    work page 1971

  28. [28]

    Adaptive focusing in scattering media through sound-speed inhomogeneities: The van Cittert Zernike approach and focusing criterion,

    R. Mallart and M. Fink, “Adaptive focusing in scattering media through sound-speed inhomogeneities: The van Cittert Zernike approach and focusing criterion,”J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 3721–3732, 12 1994

    work page 1994

  29. [29]

    A heterogeneous nonlinear attenuating full-wave model of ultrasound,

    G. F. Pinton, J. Dahl, S. Rosenzweig, and G. E. Trahey, “A heterogeneous nonlinear attenuating full-wave model of ultrasound,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 474–488, 2009

    work page 2009

  30. [30]

    A fullwave model of the nonlinear wave equation with multiple relaxations and relaxing perfectly matched layers for high-order numerical finite-difference solutions,

    G. Pinton, “A fullwave model of the nonlinear wave equation with multiple relaxations and relaxing perfectly matched layers for high-order numerical finite-difference solutions,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.11476, 2021

    work page arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Labeled numerical phantom of abdominal wall for wave-physics based ultrasound imaging: applications to image reconstruction,

    L. Zhuang, O. Ostras, M. Sode, W. Simson, D. Hyun, F. Santibanez, J. Dahl, and G. Pinton, “Labeled numerical phantom of abdominal wall for wave-physics based ultrasound imaging: applications to image reconstruction,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., pp. 1–1, 2025

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Noninvasive estimation of local speed of sound by pulse-echo ultrasound in a rat model of nonalcoholic fatty liver,

    A. V . Telichko, R. Ali, T. Brevett, H. Wang, J. G. Vilches-Moure, S. U. Kumar, R. Paulmurugan, and J. J. Dahl, “Noninvasive estimation of local speed of sound by pulse-echo ultrasound in a rat model of nonalcoholic fatty liver,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 67, no. 1, p. 015007, jan 2022

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Reverberation noise suppression in ultrasound channel signals using a 3D fully convolutional neural network,

    L. L. Brickson, D. Hyun, M. Jakovljevic, and J. J. Dahl, “Reverberation noise suppression in ultrasound channel signals using a 3D fully convolutional neural network,”IEEE Trans. Med. Imag., vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 1184–1195, 2021

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    The generalized contrast- to-noise ratio: A formal definition for lesion detectability,

    A. Rodriguez-Molares, O. M. H. Rindal, J. D’hooge, S.-E. M ˚asøy, A. Austeng, M. A. Lediju Bell, and H. Torp, “The generalized contrast- to-noise ratio: A formal definition for lesion detectability,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 745–759, 2020

    work page 2020

  35. [35]

    3-D traveltime computation using the fast marching method,

    J. A. Sethian and A. M. Popovici, “3-D traveltime computation using the fast marching method,”Geophysics, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 516–523, 1999

    work page 1999

  36. [36]

    UltraFlex: Iterative model-based ultrasonic flexible- array shape calibration,

    B. N. Frey, D. Hyun, W. Simson, L. Zhuang, H. S. Hashemi, M. Schnei- der, and J. J. Dahl, “UltraFlex: Iterative model-based ultrasonic flexible- array shape calibration,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 72, no. 11, pp. 1462–1475, 2025

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    The convolutional interpretation of registration-based plane wave steered pulse-echo local sound speed estimators,

    A. S. Podkowa and M. L. Oelze, “The convolutional interpretation of registration-based plane wave steered pulse-echo local sound speed estimators,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 65, no. 2, p. 025003, Jan. 2020

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    Distributed aberration correction in handheld ultrasound based on tomographic estimates of the speed of sound,

    R. Ali, T. Mitcham, M. Singh, R. Bouchard, J. Dahl, M. Doyley, and N. Duric, “Distributed aberration correction in handheld ultrasound based on tomographic estimates of the speed of sound,” inMed. Imag. 2023: Ultrason. Imag. Tomogr., C. Boehm and N. Bottenus, Eds., vol. 12470, International Society for Optics and Photonics. SPIE, 2023, p. 1247009

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Pulse-echo speed-of-sound imaging using convex probes,

    M. Jaeger, P. St ¨ahli, N. Korta Martiartu, P. Salemi Yolgunlu, T. Frappart, C. Fraschini, and M. Frenz, “Pulse-echo speed-of-sound imaging using convex probes,”Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 67, no. 21, p. 215016, Oct. 2022

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Assessing transducer pa- rameters for accurate medium sound speed estimation and image recon- struction,

    R. Waasdorp, D. Maresca, and G. Renaud, “Assessing transducer pa- rameters for accurate medium sound speed estimation and image recon- struction,”IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 1233–1243, 2024

    work page 2024