Linear System Models for Ultrasonic Imaging: Intensity Signal Statistics

Despite a great deal of work characterizing the statistical properties of radio frequency backscattered ultrasound signals, less is known about the statistical properties of demodulated intensity signals. Analysis of intensity is made more difficult by a strong nonlinearity that arises in the process of demodulation. This limits our ability to characterize the spatial resolution and noise properties of B-mode ultrasound images. In this paper, we generalize earlier results on two-point intensity covariance using a multivariate systems approach. We derive the mean and autocovariance function of the intensity signal under Gaussian assumptions on both the object scattering function and acquisition noise, and with the assumption of a locally shift-invariant pulse-echo system function. We investigate the limiting cases of point statistics and a uniform scattering field with a stationary distribution. Results from validation studies using simulation and data from a real system applied to a uniform scattering phantom are presented. In the simulation studies, we find errors less than 10% between the theoretical mean and variance, and sample estimates of these quantities. Prediction of the intensity power spectrum (PS) in the real system exhibits good qualitative agreement (errors less than 3.5 dB for frequencies between 0.1 and 10 cyc/mm, but with somewhat higher error outside this range that may be due to the use of a window in the PS estimation procedure). We also replicate the common finding that the intensity mean is equal to its standard deviation (i.e., signal-to-noise ratio = 1) for fully developed speckle. We show how the derived statistical properties can be used to characterize the quality of an ultrasound linear array for low-contrast patterns using generalized noise-equivalent quanta directly on the intensity signal.

[1]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Objective Assessment of Sonographic: Quality II Acquisition Information Spectrum , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[2]  C. K. Abbey,et al.  Effects of frequency and bandwidth on diagnostic information transfer in ultrasonic B-Mode imaging , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[3]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Robustness of Wiener filtering as an approximation to the Bayesian observer stragegy , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium.

[4]  W.F. Walker,et al.  Generalized cystic resolution: a metric for assessing the fundamental limits on beamformer performance , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[5]  Samuel Mikaelian,et al.  On the statistics of ultrasonic spectral parameters. , 2006, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[6]  J.M. Thijssen,et al.  P2D-3 Objective Performance Testing and Quality Assurance of Medical Ultrasound Equipment , 2006, 2006 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium.

[7]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Detection performance theory for ultrasound imaging systems , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  Harrison H. Barrett,et al.  Foundations of Image Science , 2003, J. Electronic Imaging.

[9]  William D. O'Brien,et al.  Differentiation and characterization of rat mammary fibroadenomas and 4T1 mouse carcinomas using quantitative ultrasound imaging , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[10]  J.M. Reid,et al.  Computer-aided classification of breast masses in ultrasonic B-scans using a multiparameter approach , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[11]  B. Goldberg,et al.  Classification of breast masses in ultrasonic B scans using Nakagami and K distributions , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  M.F. Insana,et al.  Linear system models for ultrasonic imaging: application to signal statistics , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[13]  P. Ask Ultrasound imaging. Waves, signals and signal processing , 2002 .

[14]  G E Trahey,et al.  The impact of sound speed errors on medical ultrasound imaging. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Toward consensus on quantitative assessment of medical imaging systems. , 1995, Medical physics.

[16]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Objective assessment of image quality. II. Fisher information, Fourier crosstalk, and figures of merit for task performance. , 1995, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[17]  F. Dunn,et al.  Ultrasonic Scattering in Biological Tissues , 1992 .

[18]  J. Jensen,et al.  Calculation of pressure fields from arbitrarily shaped, apodized, and excited ultrasound transducers , 1992, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[19]  H H Barrett,et al.  Objective assessment of image quality: effects of quantum noise and object variability. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[20]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Describing small-scale structure in random media using pulse-echo ultrasound. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  S. W. Smith,et al.  Phase aberration correction in medical ultrasound using speckle brightness as a quality factor. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Gregg E. Trahey,et al.  Properties of Acoustical Speckle in the Presence of Phase Aberration Part I: First Order Statistics , 1988, Ultrasonic imaging.

[23]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Properties of Acoustical Speckle in the Presence of Phase Aberration Part II: Correlation Lengths , 1988, Ultrasonic imaging.

[24]  G E Trahey,et al.  Properties of acoustical speckle in the presence of phase aberration. Part I: First order statistics. , 1988, Ultrasonic imaging.

[25]  G E Trahey,et al.  Properties of acoustical speckle in the presence of phase aberration. Part II: Correlation lengths. , 1988, Ultrasonic imaging.

[26]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Gray level transforms and lesion detectability in echographic images. , 1988, Ultrasonic imaging.

[27]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Statistical properties of radio-frequency and envelope-detected signals with applications to medical ultrasound. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[28]  J. Walkup,et al.  Statistical optics , 1986, IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics.

[29]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Unified SNR analysis of medical imaging systems , 1985, Physics in medicine and biology.

[30]  F. G. Sommer,et al.  Spleen structure in Hodgkin disease: ultrasonic characterization. Work in progress. , 1984, Radiology.

[31]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Statistics of Speckle in Ultrasound B-Scans , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[32]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Low Contrast Detectability and Contrast/Detail Analysis in Medical Ultrasound , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[33]  M Fatemi,et al.  Ultrasonic B-scan imaging: theory of image formation and a technique for restoration. , 1980, Ultrasonic imaging.

[34]  J C Gore,et al.  Ultrasonic backscattering from human tissue: a realistic model. , 1977, Physics in medicine and biology.

[35]  J. Bendat,et al.  Random Data: Analysis and Measurement Procedures , 1987 .

[36]  John Bowman Thomas,et al.  An introduction to statistical communication theory , 1969 .

[37]  R. Shaw,et al.  The Equivalent Quantum Efficiency of the Photographic Process , 1963 .

[38]  D. O. North,et al.  An Analysis of the factors which determine signal/noise discrimination in pulsed-carrier systems , 1963 .

[39]  D. Middleton,et al.  Some general results in the theory of noise through non-linear devices , 1948 .

[40]  S. Rice Mathematical analysis of random noise , 1944 .