A comparison of the performance of time-delay estimators in medical ultrasound

被引:172
|
作者
Viola, F [1 ]
Walker, WF [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Virginia, Dept Biomed Engn, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1109/TUFFC.2003.1197962
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Time-delay estimation (TDE) is a common operation in ultrasound signal processing. In applications such as blood flow estimation, elastography, phase aberration correction, and many more, the quality of final results is heavily dependent upon the performance of the time-delay estimator implemented. In the past years, several algorithms have been developed and applied in medical ultrasound, sonar, radar, and other fields. In this paper we analyze the performances of the widely used normalized and non-normalized correlations, along with normalized covariance, sum absolute differences (SAD), sum squared differences (SSD), hybrid-sign correlation, polarity-coincidence correlation, and the Meyr-Spies method. These techniques have been applied to simulated ultrasound radio frequency (RF) data under a variety of conditions. We show how parameters, which include center frequency, fractional bandwidth, kernel window size, Signal decorrelation, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) affect the quality of the delay estimate. Simulation results also are compared with a theoretical performance limit set by the Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB). Results show that, for high SNR, high signal correlation, and large kernel size, all of the algorithms closely match the theoretical bound, with relative performances that vary by as much as 20%. As conditions degrade, the performances of various algorithms differ more significantly. For signals with a correlation level of 0.98, SNR of 30 dB, center frequency of 5 MHz with a fractional bandwidth of 0.5, and kernel size of 2 mus, the standard deviation of the jitter error is on the order of few nanoseconds. Normalized correlation, normalized covariance, and SSD have an approximately equal jitter error of 2.23 ns (the value predicted by the CRLB is 2.073 ns), whereas the polarity-coincidence correlation performs less well with a jitter error of 2.74 ns.
引用
收藏
页码:392 / 401
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of time delay estimators in medical ultrasound
    Viola, F
    Walker, WF
    2001 IEEE ULTRASONICS SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2001, : 1485 - 1488
  • [2] Performance of time-delay estimators
    Bagaini, C
    GEOPHYSICS, 2005, 70 (04) : V109 - V120
  • [3] PERFORMANCE OF FAST TIME-DELAY ESTIMATORS
    CUSANI, R
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ACOUSTICS SPEECH AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1989, 37 (05): : 757 - 759
  • [4] A Comparison of Time-Delay Estimators for Speckle Tracking Echocardiography
    de Almeida, Thomaz Maia
    Cortez, Paulo C.
    Cavalcanti Neto, Edson
    Ribeiro, Alyson B. N.
    Rodrigues, Valberto E.
    XXVI BRAZILIAN CONGRESS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, CBEB 2018, VOL. 2, 2019, 70 (02): : 11 - 16
  • [5] MEDICAL ULTRASOUND IMAGER BASED ON TIME-DELAY SPECTROMETRY
    HEYSER, RC
    HESTENES, JD
    ROONEY, JA
    GAMMELL, PM
    LECROISSETTE, DH
    ULTRASONICS, 1989, 27 (01) : 31 - 38
  • [6] THE STRUCTURE AND PERFORMANCE OF ESTIMATORS FOR REAL-TIME ESTIMATION OF RANDOMLY VARYING TIME-DELAY
    MEYR, H
    SPIES, G
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ACOUSTICS SPEECH AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1984, 32 (01): : 81 - 94
  • [7] OPTIMISTIC AND PESSIMISTIC APPROXIMATIONS TO VARIANCE OF TIME-DELAY ESTIMATORS
    SALT, JE
    WACKER, AG
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ACOUSTICS SPEECH AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1989, 37 (05): : 634 - 641
  • [8] A comparison between spline-based and phase-domain time-delay estimators
    Viola, F
    Walker, WF
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ULTRASONICS FERROELECTRICS AND FREQUENCY CONTROL, 2006, 53 (03) : 515 - 517
  • [9] A Unified Approach for Time-Delay Estimators in Spread Spectrum Communications
    Benedetto, Francesco
    Giunta, Gaetano
    Bucci, Simone
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, 2011, 59 (12) : 3421 - 3429
  • [10] Optimal Linear Estimators for Time-delay Systems with Fading Measurement
    Li, Yazhou
    Wang, Xin
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 30TH CHINESE CONTROL AND DECISION CONFERENCE (2018 CCDC), 2018, : 4597 - 4602