Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 560

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An axial velocity estimator for ultrasound blood flow imaging, based on a full evaluation of the Doppler equation by means of a two-dimensional autocorrelation approach

Loupas, T., Powers, J.T., Gill, R.W.·1995·IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control

Abstract

This paper introduces a new velocity estimator, referred to as the 2D autocorrelator, which differs from conventional Doppler techniques in two respects: the derivation of axial velocity values by evaluating the Doppler equation using explicit estimates of both the mean Doppler and the mean RF frequency at each range gate location; and, the 2D nature (depth samples versus pulse transmissions) of processing within the range gate. The estimator's output can be calculated by evaluating the 2D autocorrelation function of the demodulated (baseband) backscattered echoes at two lags. A full derivation and mathematical description of the estimator is presented, based on the framework of the 2D Fourier transform. The same framework is adopted to analyze two other established velocity estimators (the conventional 1D autocorrelator and the crosscorrelator) in a unifying manner, and theoretical arguments as well as experimental results are used to highlight the common aspects of all three estimators. In addition, a thorough performance evaluation is carried out by means of extensive simulations, which document the effect of a number of factors (velocity spread, range gate length, ensemble length, noise level, transmitted bandwidth) and provide an insight into the optimum parameters and trade-offs associated with individual algorithms. Overall, the 2D autocorrelator is shown to offer the best performance in the context of the specific simulation conditions considered here. Its superiority over the crosscorrelator is restricted to cases of low signal-to-noise ratios. However, the 2D autocorrelator always outperforms the conventional 1D autocorrelator by a significant margin. These comparisons, when linked to the computational requirements of the proposed estimator, suggest that it combines the generally higher performance of 2D broadband time-domain techniques with the relatively modest complexity of 1D narrowband phase-domain velocity estimators.>

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/58.393110

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Cited by

See all 560

Metadata

Authors
Loupas, T., Powers, J. T., & Gill, R. W.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control
Published
1995-07
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
672-688
ISSN
0885-3010 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2153608106
Cited by
560
References
36
FWCI
6.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An axial velocity estimator for ultrasound blood flow imaging, based on a full evaluation of the Doppler equation by means of a two-dimensional autocorrelation approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/58.393110
The paper
Loupas, T., Powers, J. T., & Gill, R. W. (1995). An axial velocity estimator for ultrasound blood flow imaging, based on a full evaluation of the Doppler equation by means of a two-dimensional autocorrelation approach. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control. https://doi.org/10.1109/58.393110

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.