Publication Details

Benchmark problems for transcranial ultrasound simulation: Intercomparison of compressional wave models

AUBRY, J.; BATES, O.; BOEHM, C.; PAULY, K.; CHRISTENSEN, D.; CUETO, C.; GÉLAT, P.; GUASCH, L.; JAROŠ, J.; JING, Y.; JONES, R.; LI, N.; MARTY, P.; MONTANARO, H.; NEUFELD, E.; PICHARDO, S.; PINTON, G.; PULKKINEN, A.; STANZIOLA, A.; THIELSCHER, A.; TREEBY, B.; VAN 'T WOUT, E. Benchmark problems for transcranial ultrasound simulation: Intercomparison of compressional wave models. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2022, vol. 152, no. 2, p. 1003-1019. ISSN: 1520-8524.
Czech title
Benchmarkové problémy pro transkraniální ultrazvukovou simulaci: Vzájemné porovnání kompresních vlnových modelů
Type
journal article
Language
English
Authors
Aubry Jean-Francois
Bates Oscar
Boehm Christian
Pauly Kim Butts
Christensen Douglas
Cueto Carlos
Gélat Pierre
Guasch Lluis
Jaroš Jiří, doc. Ing., Ph.D. (DCSY)
Jing Yun
Jones Rebecca
Li Ningrui
Marty Patrick
Montanaro Hazael
Neufeld Esra
Pichardo Samuel
Pinton Gianmarco
Pulkkinen Aki
Stanziola Antonio
Thielscher Axel
Treeby Bradley
van 't Wout Elwin
URL
Keywords

Transcranial Ultrasound Simulations, Wave Models, Benchmaks

Abstract

Computational models of acoustic wave propagation are frequently used in
transcranial ultrasound therapy, forexample, to calculate the intracranial
pressure field or to calculate phase delays to correct for skull distortions.To
allow intercomparison between the different modeling tools and techniques used by
the community, aninternational working group was convened to formulate a set of
numerical benchmarks. Here, these benchmarksare presented, along with
intercomparison results. Nine different benchmarks of increasing geometric
complexityare defined. These include a single-layer planar bone immersed in
water, a multi-layer bone, and a whole skull.Two transducer configurations are
considered (a focused bowl and a plane piston operating at 500 kHz), giving
atotal of 18 permutations of the benchmarks. Eleven different modeling tools are
used to compute the benchmarkresults. The models span a wide range of numerical
techniques, including the finite-difference time-domainmethod, angular spectrum
method, pseudospectral method, boundary-element method, and
spectral-elementmethod. Good agreement is found between the models, particularly
for the position, size, and magnitude of theacoustic focus within the skull. When
comparing results for each model with every other model in a cross-comparison,
the median values for each benchmark for the difference in focal pressure and
position are less than10% and 1 mm, respectively. The benchmark definitions,
model results, and intercomparison codes are freelyavailable to facilitate
further comparisons.

Published
2022
Pages
1003–1019
Journal
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, vol. 152, no. 2, ISSN 1520-8524
DOI
10.1121/10.0013426
UT WoS
000841281700001
EID Scopus
2-s2.0-85137061715
BibTeX 
@article{BUT178884,
  author="Jean-Francois {Aubry} and Oscar {Bates} and Christian {Boehm} and Kim Butts {Pauly} and Douglas {Christensen} and Carlos {Cueto} and Pierre {Gélat} and Lluis {Guasch} and Jiří {Jaroš} and Yun {Jing} and Rebecca {Jones} and Ningrui {Li} and Patrick {Marty} and Hazael {Montanaro} and Esra {Neufeld} and Samuel {Pichardo} and Gianmarco {Pinton} and Aki {Pulkkinen} and Antonio {Stanziola} and Axel {Thielscher} and Bradley {Treeby} and Elwin {van 't Wout}",
  title="Benchmark problems for transcranial ultrasound simulation: Intercomparison of compressional wave models",
  journal="Journal of the Acoustical Society of America",
  year="2022",
  volume="152",
  number="2",
  pages="1003--1019",
  doi="10.1121/10.0013426",
  issn="1520-8524",
  url="https://asa.scitation.org/doi/10.1121/10.0013426"
}
Files
Back to top