Enhanced Linear-array Photoacoustic Beamforming using Modified
Coherence Factor
Moein Mozaffarzadeha,c , Yan Yand , Mohammad Mehrmohammadid , Bahador
Makkiabadia,b,*

arXiv:1710.00157v2 [physics.med-ph] 29 Jan 2018

a

Research Center for Biomedical Technologies and Robotics (RCBTR), Institute for Advanced Medical Technologies
(IAMT), Tehran, Iran.
b
Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
c
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
d
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.

Abstract. Photoacoustic imaging (PAI) is a promising medical imaging modality providing the spatial resolution of
ultrasound (US) imaging and the contrast of optical imaging. For linear-array PAI, an image beamformer can be used
as the reconstruction algorithm. Delay-and-sum (DAS) is the most prevalent beamforming algorithm in PAI. However,
using DAS beamformer leads to low resolution images as well as high sidelobes due to non desired contribution of
off-axis signals. Coherence factor (CF) is a weighting method in which each pixel of the reconstructed image is
weighted, based on the spatial spectrum of the aperture, to mainly improve the contrast. In this paper, we demonstrate
that the numerator of the formula of CF contains a DAS algebra, and it is proposed to use the delay-multiply-and-sum
(DMAS) beamformer instead of the available DAS on the numerator. The proposed weighting technique, modified
CF (MCF), has been evaluated numerically and experimentally compared to CF. It was shown that MCF leads to
lower sidelobes and better detectable targets. The quantitative results of the experiment (using wire targets) show that
MCF leads to for about 45% and 40% improvement, in comparison with CF, in the terms of signal-to-noise ratio and
full-width-half-maximum, respectively.
Keywords: Photoacoustic imaging, beamforming, linear-array imaging, noise suppression, contrast improvement..
*Bahador Makkiabadi, b-makkiabadi@tums.ac.ir

1 Introduction
Photoacoustic imaging (PAI), also called optoacoustic imaging, is an emerging medical imaging
technique which combines the properties of optical and ultrasound (US) imaging.1, 2 PAI is based
on the photoacoustic (PA) effect, and combined US and PA properties provide structural, functional and potentially the molecular information of tissue.3, 4 In this imaging modality, acoustic
waves are generated, as a result of an electromagnetic pulse illumination, based on thermoelastic
effect.5 Then, the optical absorption distribution map of the tissue is reconstructed through a reconstruction algorithm.6 PAI is a scalable imaging modality used in different preclinical and clinical
applications e.g., tumor detection,7, 8 ocular imaging,9 monitoring oxygenation in blood vessels,10
1

and functional imaging.5, 11 There are two types of PAI: photoacoustic tomography (PAT) and photoacoustic microscopy (PAM).12–14 In PAT, an array of US transducers in the form of linear, arc
or circular shape is used for data acquisition, and mathematical reconstruction algorithms are used
to obtain optical absorption distribution map of the tissue.15 Recently, low-cost PAT and PAM
systems are extensively being investigated16–19
In linear-array PAI, image reconstruction is done with beamformers, as in US imaging. The problem of image reconstruction in linear-array imaging for PAI and US imaging can be addressed in
almost a same way. There are some modifications which should be considered in image reconstruction for these two imaging modalities, and the modifications are directly concerned with the
transmission part.20 In US imaging, US pulses are transmitted, but in PAI, the laser illumination
plays the excitation role. There are many studies focused on using one beamforming technique
for US and PA image formation to reduce the cost of the integrated US/PA system.21–23 Delayand-sum (DAS), as the most basic and commonly used beamformer in US and PAI due to its
simple implementation, is a blind beamformer and results in low quality images.24 Development
of a proper beamforming algorithm has been widely investigated in US imaging in different studies.25–28 Adaptive beamforming such as minimum variance (MV) can be a proper option to weight
the signals and reduce the effect of the off-axis signals in the reconstructed images.29 MV combined with CF has been used for PAI.30 Short-lag spatial coherence (SLSC) beamformer was used
in PAI for contract enhancement.31 Recently, to address the relatively poor appearance of interventional devices such as needles, guide wires, and catheters, in conventional US images, delay
and standard deviation (DASD) beamforming algorithm was introduced.32 In 2015,33 Matrone et
al. introduced a new beamforming algorithm namely delay-multiply-and-sum (DMAS). This algorithm was initially used as a reconstruction algorithm in confocal microwave imaging for breast
2

cancer detection.34 Although it leads to a higher resolution compared to DAS, the resolution is not
well enough in comparison with the resolution gained by MV-based algorithms. MV beamformer
has been combined with DMAS algorithm to improve the resolution of DMAS.35, 36 Double stage
DMAS (DS-DMAS) was introduced for PAI.37, 38 In addition, it was shown that it outperforms
DMAS in the terms of contrast and sidelobes for US imaging too.39 Eigenspace-Based Minimum
Variance (EIBMV) and forward-backward (FB) MV beamformers also have been applied to medical US imaging to improve the image quality and robustness.40, 41 EIBMV was combined with
DMAS to further improve the PA image quality.42, 43
In this paper, a novel version of coherence factor (CF) algorithms is introduced. We have demonstrated that the numerator in the formula of the CF weighting procedure is the output of DAS
algorithm, and it is proposed to improve the image quality by including DMAS algebra in CF,
instead of the existing DAS.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains the theory of beamformers and
the proposed method. Numerical simulation of the imaging system and the experimental design
along with the results, and the performance evaluation are presented in section 3 and section 4,
respectively. Discussion is presented in section 5, and finally the conclusion is presented in section
6.
2 Materials and Methods
PA signals are generated and detected after the laser has illuminated the imaging target. The
obtained signals can be used to reconstruct the PA images through a reconstruction algorithm such

3

as DAS which can be written as follows:

yDAS (k) =

M
X
i=1

xi (k − ∆i ),

(1)

where yDAS (k) is the output of beamformer, k is the time index, M is the number of array elements and xi (k) and ∆i are the detected signals and the corresponding time delay for detector
i, respectively.44 To provide a more efficient beamformer and improve the quality of the reconstructed image, coherence factor (CF) can be used combined with DAS, which leads to sidelobe
levels reduction and contrast enhancement.45 CF, as a weighting procedure, is presented by:
PM

2

i=1 xid (k)
,
CF (k) =
P
2
|x
(k)|
M M
id
i=1

(2)

where xid is the delayed detected signal. The output of combined DAS and CF is given by:

yDAS+CF (k) = CF (k) × yDAS (k).

(3)

Implementing the DAS beamformer is simple which is why is it the most common beamforming
algorithm in US and PAI. However, this algorithm provides a low off-axis signal rejection and noise
suppression. Consequently, DAS results in reconstructed images having high levels of sidelobe and
a low resolution. To address the limitations of DAS, DMAS was suggested in.33 The same as DAS,
DMAS calculates corresponding samples for each element of the array based on the delays, but
samples go through a correlation process before adding them up. The DMAS formula is as follows:

4

yDM AS (k) =

M
−1
X

M
X

i=1 j=i+1

xi (k − ∆i )xj (k − ∆j ).

(4)

To overcome the dimensionally squared problem of (4), following modifications are suggested
in:33
x̂ij (k) =
q
sign[xi (k − ∆i )xj (k − ∆j )] |xi (k − ∆i )xj (k − ∆j )|,
for

(5)

1 6 i 6 j 6 M.

yDM AS (k) =

M
−1
X

M
X

x̂ij (k).

(6)

i=1 j=i+1

DMAS algorithm is a correlation process, and a non-linear beamforming algorithm in which the
autocorrelation of the aperture is used. A product in time domain is equivalent to the convolution
of the spectra of the signals in the frequency domain. Consequently, new components centered at
the zero frequency and the harmonic frequency appear in the spectrum due to the similar ranges of
frequency for xi (k − ∆i ) and xj (k − ∆j ). A band-pass filter is applied on the beamformed output
signal to only pass the necessary frequency components, generated after the non-linear operations.
Having a closer look at (2), the numerator of CF algorithm is the output of DAS beamformer, and
the formula can be written as follows:
2

yDAS (k)
CF (k) =
.
PM
M i=1 |xid (k)|2

(7)

Having CF combined with DAS, (3), leads to sidelobes reduction and contrast enhancement compared to (1). However, in this paper, it is proposed to use the output of DMAS algorithm instead

5

of the DAS algebra on the numerator of CF formula. The proposed weighting is called modified
CF (MCF), and its algebra is as follows:
2

yDM AS (k)
.
M CF (k) =
PM
M i=1 |xid (k)|2

(8)

MCF will be used the same as CF to weight the samples. The combination of DAS and MCF can
be written as follows:
yDAS+M CF (k) = M CF (k) × yDAS (k).

(9)

Since the DMAS outperforms DAS in the terms of resolution and sidelobes, it is expected that the
proposed weighting method provides a higher image quality compared to (2). In what follows, it
is shown that the proposed method outperforms the conventional CF weighting.
3 Numerical Results and Performance Assessment
In this section, numerical results are presented to evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithm in comparison with DAS and combination of DAS and CF (DAS+CF).
3.1 Point Targets
K-wave Matlab toolbox was used to simulate the numerical study.46 Eleven 0.1 mm spherical
absorbers were positioned along the vertical axis every 5 mm as initial pressure. The first absorber
was 25 mm away from the transducer surface. The imaging region was 20 mm in lateral axis
and 80 mm in vertical axis. A linear array having M =128 elements operating at 7 M Hz central
frequency and 77 % fractional bandwidth was used to detect the PA signals generated from defined
initial pressures. The sampling frequency is 50 M Hz. Speed of sound was assumed to be 1540

6

Fig 1: Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and (c)
DAS+MCF. A linear array and point targets were used for numerical design. All images are shown
with a dynamic range of 60 dB. Noise was added to the detected signals having a SNR of 50 dB .
m/s during simulations. Envelope detection, performed by means of the Hilbert transform, has
been used for all presented images, and the obtained lines are normalized and log-compressed to
form the final images.
The reconstructed images are shown in Fig. 1 where Gaussian noise was added to the detected signals having a SNR of 50 dB. As is demonstrated, DAS leads to high sidelobes and after the depth
of 50 mm the targets are barely detectable as a point target. Using CF combined with DAS results
in lower sidelobes and a higher image quality. Fig. 1(c) shows that the proposed method suppresses
the artifacts and sidelobes more than the conventional CF. To compare the reconstructed images
in detail, the lateral variations at two depths of imaging are shown in Fig. 2. As it is demonstrated,
the MCF method causes lower sidelobes. Consider, for instance, the depth of 25 mm where the
levels of sidelobes for DAS, DAS+CF and DAS+MCF are for about -36 dB, -99 dB and -124 dB,
which indicates the superiority of the proposed method compared to the conventional CF in the

7

Fig 2: Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 1 at the depths of (a) 25 mm
and (b) 40 mm.

Fig 3: Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and (c)
DAS+MCF. A linear array and point targets were used for numerical design. All images are shown
with a dynamic range of 60 dB. Noise was added to the detected signals having a SNR of 0 dB .
term of sidelobe reduction.
To evaluate the proposed method at the presence of high level of noise of the imaging system,
Gaussian noise was added to the detected signals having a SNR of 0 dB. The reconstructed images are shown in Fig. 3, and as can be seen, the formed image obtained by DAS is highly affected
by noise. CF improves the image quality by suppressing the effects of noise. However, the sidelobes still degrade the image quality. The MCF reduces the sidelobes and improves the target
8

Fig 4: Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 3 at the depths of (a) 25 mm
and (b) 45 mm.
detectability, resulting in a higher image quality in comparison with CF. It should be noticed that
the absence of the tails attached to the targets (can be seen in Fig. 1) is due to the high level of
noise. To put it more simply, the power of noise is more than the tails, and that is why they are
not seen in Fig. 3. The lateral variations for the images shown in Fig. 3, are shown in Fig. 4, and
as can be seen, the higher performance of MCF in the terms of sideloebs and noise suppression,
compared to CF, is clear.
3.2 Quantitative Evaluation
To quantitatively assess the performance of the proposed weighting method, the full-with-halfmaximum (FWHM) in -6 dB and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) are calculated and presented in Table
1 and Table 2, respectively. SNR is calculated using the method explained in.37 As shown in Table
1, the FWHM gained by MCF, at the all depths, is lower than CF, showing the superiority of MCF.
Consider, for instance, the depth of 40 mm where DAS, DAS+CF and DAS+MCF results in 2.2
mm, 1.3 mm and 0.9 mm, respectively. In other word, MCF improves the FWHM for about 0.4
mm compared to CF. As shown in Table 2, SNR gained by the proposed weighting method is
higher compared to the CF which also indicates the superiority of MCF. Consider, for example,
the depth of 50 mm where the SNR for DAS, DAS+CF and DAS+MCF is for about 36.9 dB, 65.0
9

Table 1: -6 dB FWHM (mm) values at the different depths.
``Beamformer
DAS DAS+CF DAS+MCF
```
```
Depth(mm)
`
25
1.1
0.6
0.4
1.3
0.8
0.6
30
35
1.6
0.9
0.7
1.9
1.1
0.8
40
45
2.2
1.3
0.9
50
2.6
1.6
1.1
3.0
1.8
1.3
55
60
3.5
2.1
1.5
3.7
2.2
1.6
65
70
4.2
2.5
1.8
75
4.8
2.9
2.0

```
```

Table 2: SNR (dB) values at the different depths.
``Beamformer
DAS DAS+CF DAS+MCF
```
```
Depth(mm)
`
25
47.2
76.3
119.6
30
44.7
73.0
116.9
43.0
72.9
117.8
35
40.7
69.5
116.5
40
45
38.9
68.0
113.3
36.9
65.0
110.4
50
35.3
63.4
109.0
55
60
34.2
61.8
107.3
65
33.5
60.1
105.3
32.2
58.6
103.2
70
75
31.4
56.2
101.6

```
```

dB and 110.4 dB, respectively.
3.3 MCF Applied to DMAS
It should be noted that the proposed method in this paper is a weighting technique which can be
applied to any beamformer to achieve a higher image quality. Here, the aim is to evaluate the MCF
when is applied to other beamformers except DAS. The DMAS beamformer was selected. The
results are presented in Fig. 5. As demonstrated, the proposed method leads to higher sidelobes
reduction and artifacts removal when it is applied on the DMAS, compared to CF. In other words,
10

Fig 5: Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF, (c)
DAS+MCF, (d) DMAS, (e) DMAS+CF and (e) DMAS+MCF. A linear array and point targets
were used for numerical design. All images are shown with a dynamic range of 70 dB. Noise was
added to the detected signals having a SNR of 20 dB .

Fig 6: Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 5 at the depths of 45 mm.
even though the CF degrades the sidelobes (in DAS and DMAS), MCF outperforms the conventional CF with a higher artifacts suppression. For further evaluation, consider the lateral variations
at the depth of 45 mm, shown in Fig. 6, where the MCF reduces the sidelobes for about 20 dB,
compared to the conventional CF.

11

Fig 7: The schematic of the setup used for the experimental PAI.
Table 3: FWHM (mm) values, in -6 dB, at the two depths of imaging using the experimental data.
```
```
``Beamformer
DAS DAS+CF DAS+MCF
```
```
Depth(mm)
`
22
0.68
0.59
0.30
24
0.66
0.47
0.28
4 Experimental Results
To further evaluate the proposed weighting method and its effect on enhancing PA images, phantom experiments were performed in which a phantom consists of 2 light absorbing wires with
diameter of 150 µm were placed 1 mm apart from each other in a water tank. The schematic of the
experimental setup is shown in Fig. 7. In this experiment, we utilized a Nd:YAG pulsed laser, with
the pulse repetition rate of 30 Hz at wavelengths of 532 nm. A programmable digital ultrasound
scanner (Verasonics Vantage 128), equipped with a linear array transducer (L11-4v) operating at
frequency range between 4 to 9 M Hz was utilized to acquire the PA RF data. A high speed FPGA
was used to synchronize the light excitation and PA signal acquisition.
The reconstructed images are shown in Fig. 8. As it is demonstrated, DAS results in high levels
of noise in the images, degrading the image quality, and image is affected by sidelobes. Using CF
improves the images quality, but the image is still affected by noise and sidelobes. Finally, the
proposed weighting method enhances the image by providing higher noise suppression and lower
12

Fig 8: Reconstructed images for the experimental detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and
(c) DAS+MCF. A linear array and wire target phantom were used for the experimental design. All
images are shown with a dynamic range of 80 dB.
levels of sidelobes compared to conventional CF. To evaluate in more detail, the lateral variations at
two depths for targets shown in Fig. 8, are presented in Fig. 9. Considering Fig. 9(a), the proposed
weighting method results in lower sidelobes and noise where DAS, DAS+CF and DAS+MCF leads
to -40 dB, -84 dB and -134 dB, respectively. Thus, the proposed method outperforms conventional
CF. FWHM in -6 dB has been calculated for the experimental results and shown in Table 3. It can
be seen that the proposed weighting method results in narrower mainlobe in comparison with CF.
Consider, for example, the target at the depth of 22 mm where DAS+MCF results in 0.38 mm
0.29 mm improvement compared to DAS and DAS+CF, respectively. Moreover, SNR has been
calculated for the experimental data and the results are shown in Table 4 where the MCF causes
higher SNR compared to conventional CF for both depths of imaging.

13

Fig 9: Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 8 at the depths of (a) 22 mm
and (b) 24 mm.
Table 4: SNR (dB) values for the experimental images shown in Fig. 8.
```
```
``Beamformer
DAS DAS+CF DAS+MCF
```
```
Depth(mm)
`
22
48.5
60.7
90.4
24
47.2
59.6
88.2
4.1 Ex Vivo Imaging
In this study, an ex vivo experimental tissue study have been designed to evaluate the performance
of the proposed algorithm. A piece of a breast tissue (about 4 cm× 4 cm× 3 cm) is extracted
from a new sacrificed chicken. Two pencil leads with a diameter of 0.5 mm are embedded inside
the breast tissue, having an axial distance of about 5 mm. Fig 10 shows the photographs of the
imaged tissue. The PA signals are collected with a combined linear US/PA imaging probe.47 As
can be seen in Fig. 11(a), the artifacts and the background noise degrade the PA image quality
obtained by DAS. As is expected based on the previous results, applying CF to the DAS algorithm
would reduce the artifacts and sidelobes. The expectations are satisfied, as shown in Fig. 11(b),
but the PA image can be further improved using MCF. As demonstrated in Fig. 11(c), the MCF
leads to higher noise suppression and sidelobes degrading in comparison with the conventional
CF. For further evaluation, the lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 11, are
presented in Fig. 12 where the superiority of the proposed method in terms of lower sidelobes and
14

Fig 10: (a) The phantom used for the experiment. (b) The ex vivo imaging setup.

Fig 11: Reconstructed ex vivo images using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and (c) DAS+MCF. A lineararray and the phantom shown in Fig. 10 were used for the experimental design. All images are
shown with a dynamic range of 80 dB.
higher noise suppression is obvious. SNR is calculated for the ex vivo images (presented in Table
5). The quantitative evaluation indicates that MCF outperforms the conventional CF. In particular,
it improves the SNR for about 14 dB, at the depth of 31.3 mm, compared to the CF.
5 Discussion
The main enhancement gained by the proposed method is higher contrast and lower sidelobes.
Considering the fact that DAS beamformer results in a low quality image, having it on the numerator of the formula of CF would degrade the performance of the CF weighting procedure. On
15

Fig 12: Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 11 at the depths of (a) 29 mm
and (b) 31.3 mm.
Table 5: SNR (dB) values for the ex vivo images shown in Fig. 11.
```
```
``Beamformer
DAS DAS+CF DAS+MCF
```
```
Depth(mm)
`
29
41.34
52.81
68.99
40.35
50.78
64.84
31.3
the other hand, in,33 Matrone et al. proved that DMAS can be used instead of DAS for image reconstruction, and it was shown that the main improvement gained by DMAS was higher contrast.
Thus, it can be perceived that using DMAS instead of the existing DAS on the numerator of CF
algebra would results in contrast enhancement due to its auto-correlation process which is a nonlinear operation. As can be seen in Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Fig. 8 and Fig. 11, using the correlation process
of DMAS inside the formula of CF results in higher noise suppression and artifact reduction, leading to the higher image quality compared to DAS and DAS+CF. In other word, the multiplication
operation inside the DMAS procedure reduces the presence of noise and off-axis signals on the
reconstructed images, and improves the image quality. The advantage of the proposed weighting
method in the term of sidelobes reduction can be seen in the Fig. 2, Fig. 4, Fig. 9 and Fig. 12.
As can be seen in the lateral variations, the width of mainlobe has decreased which is a merit of
MCF. Since DMAS improves the resolution gained by DAS, shown in,37 the MCF leads to higher
resolution in comparison with CF. To put it more simply, presence of DMAS inside the formula
16

of MCF is the reason of higher resolution achieved by MCF. Despite all the results, it was necessary to evaluate the proposed method quantitatively. Considering the numbers presented in the
Tables of the last section, it can be seen that the proposed method outperforms CF in the terms of
FWHM and SNR. The proposed method significantly outperforms CF when the targets are at the
high depths of imaging. As shown in Fig. 1, for the targets located at the depths of 55 mm-75 mm,
sidelobes and artifatcs are better reduced compared to the lower depths. This also can be perceived
regarding the Table 2 where SNR improvement in high depths is more than lower depths (80 %
and 56 % for 25 mm and 75 mm, respectively). It should be noticed that, as mentioned in the
section 1, the beamforming and concerned weighting methods can be applied on both the US and
PAI cases. CF or MCF would be proper options for US imaging. However, using multiple times
of the CF or MCF ( MCF2 and MCF3 ) would remove the speckles in the US images. The speckle
removal is not desired in applications in which the speckles provide helpful information for diagnosis. Therefore, the MCF2 and MCF3 would further increase the quality of the PA images, but
it is not suggested to use them for the conventional US imaging. MCF The computational burden
imposed by the proposed method is the same as DMAS, and the order of processing in O(M 2 )
while the order of processing for CF is the same as DAS which is O(M ). Therefore, it should be
mentioned that the improvements are obtained at the expense of higher computational burden in
comparison with CF. The proposed method can be implemented on a FPGA device, e.g. on an
Altera FPGA of the Stratix IV family (Altera Corp., San Jose, CA, USA). The time consumption
has been reported in33 for DMAS implementation, which indicates that the proposed method can
be used in clinical PAI systems. In applications in which phased (or micro-convex) arrays are used,
MCF can provide a further enhancement compared to CF. We have tested the proposed algorithm
for ex vivo PAI, and the results were promising (shown in Fig. 11 and Fig. 12). In small-parts
17

and vascular US imaging, for instance in vivo imaging of the carotid artery, where the resolution
and specially sidelobes are of importance, MCF can be used, providing higher contrast and noise
suppression in comparison with CF.
6 Conclusion
In this paper, a novel weighting procedure has been introduced by combining the conventional CF
and the DMAS beamformer. It was shown that the numerator of the formula of CF can be treated
as a DAS, and it was proposed to use DMAS instead of the existing DAS inside the formula of
CF. The MCF has been evaluated numerically and experimentally, and all the results showed the
higher performance of MCF compared to CF. For the experimental results obtained by the wire
target phantom, MCF reduced the sidelobes for about 50 dB in comparison with CF, indicating the
higher contrast, and the quantitative results showed that MCF improves the SNR and FWHM for
about 45% and 40%, respectively.
Acknowledgments
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors, and the authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
References
1 L. Li, L. Zhu, C. Ma, et al., “Single-impulse panoramic photoacoustic computed tomography
of small-animal whole-body dynamics at high spatiotemporal resolution,” Nature Biomedical
Engineering 1(5), Art–No (2017).
2 L. V. Wang and J. Yao, “A practical guide to photoacoustic tomography in the life sciences,”
Nature methods 13(8), 627–638 (2016).
18

3 J. Xia and L. V. Wang, “Small-animal whole-body photoacoustic tomography: a review,”
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 61(5), 1380–1389 (2014).
4 M. Mehrmohammadi, S. Joon Yoon, D. Yeager, et al., “Photoacoustic imaging for cancer
detection and staging,” Current molecular imaging 2(1), 89–105 (2013).
5 M. Nasiriavanaki, J. Xia, H. Wan, et al., “High-resolution photoacoustic tomography
of resting-state functional connectivity in the mouse brain,” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 111(1), 21–26 (2014).
6 M. Jeon and C. Kim, “Multimodal photoacoustic tomography,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 15(5), 975–982 (2013).
7 B. Guo, J. Li, H. Zmuda, et al., “Multifrequency microwave-induced thermal acoustic imaging for breast cancer detection,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 54(11),
2000–2010 (2007).
8 M. Heijblom, W. Steenbergen, and S. Manohar, “Clinical photoacoustic breast imaging: the
twente experience.,” IEEE Pulse 6(3), 42–46 (2015).
9 A. de La Zerda, Y. M. Paulus, R. Teed, et al., “Photoacoustic ocular imaging,” Optics letters
35(3), 270–272 (2010).
10 R. O. Esenaliev, I. V. Larina, K. V. Larin, et al., “Optoacoustic technique for noninvasive
monitoring of blood oxygenation: a feasibility study,” Applied Optics 41(22), 4722–4731
(2002).
11 J. Yao, J. Xia, K. I. Maslov, et al., “Noninvasive photoacoustic computed tomography of
mouse brain metabolism in vivo,” Neuroimage 64, 257–266 (2013).

19

12 Y. Zhou, J. Yao, and L. V. Wang, “Tutorial on photoacoustic tomography,” Journal of Biomedical Optics 21(6), 061007–061007 (2016).
13 J. Yao and L. V. Wang, “Photoacoustic microscopy,” Laser & Photonics Reviews 7(5), 758–
778 (2013).
14 L. V. Wang and S. Hu, “Photoacoustic tomography: in vivo imaging from organelles to organs,” Science 335(6075), 1458–1462 (2012).
15 M. Xu and L. V. Wang, “Time-domain reconstruction for thermoacoustic tomography in a
spherical geometry,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 21(7), 814–822 (2002).
16 A. Hariri, A. Fatima, N. Mohammadian, et al., “Development of low-cost photoacoustic
imaging systems using very low-energy pulsed laser diodes,” Journal of biomedical optics
22(7), 075001 (2017).
17 P. K. Upputuri and M. Pramanik, “Dynamic in vivo imaging of small animal brain using
pulsed laser diode-based photoacoustic tomography system,” Journal of biomedical optics
22(9), 090501 (2017).
18 A. Hariri, A. Fatima, N. Mohammadian, et al., “Towards low cost photoacoustic microscopy
system for evaluation of skin health,” in Imaging Spectrometry XXI, 9976, 99760X, International Society for Optics and Photonics (2016).
19 P. K. Upputuri and M. Pramanik, “Performance characterization of low-cost, high-speed,
portable pulsed laser diode photoacoustic tomography (pld-pat) system,” Biomedical optics
express 6(10), 4118–4129 (2015).
20 C.-W. Wei, T.-M. Nguyen, J. Xia, et al., “Real-time integrated photoacoustic and ultrasound

20

(paus) imaging system to guide interventional procedures: ex vivo study,” IEEE transactions
on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control 62(2), 319–328 (2015).
21 H. K. Zhang, M. A. L. Bell, X. Guo, et al., “Synthetic-aperture based photoacoustic rebeamforming (spare) approach using beamformed ultrasound data,” Biomedical optics express 7(8), 3056–3068 (2016).
22 E. Mercep, G. Jeng, S. Morscher, et al., “Hybrid optoacoustic tomography and pulse-echo
ultrasonography using concave arrays,” IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics,
and Frequency Control 62(9), 1651–1661 (2015).
23 T. Harrison and R. J. Zemp, “The applicability of ultrasound dynamic receive beamformers
to photoacoustic imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency
Control 58(10), 2259–2263 (2011).
24 C. G. Hoelen and F. F. de Mul, “Image reconstruction for photoacoustic scanning of tissue
structures,” Applied Optics 39(31), 5872–5883 (2000).
25 T. Szasz, A. Basarab, and D. Kouamé, “Beamforming through regularized inverse problems
in ultrasound medical imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 63(12), 2031–2044 (2016).
26 N. Q. Nguyen and R. W. Prager, “High-resolution ultrasound imaging with unified pixelbased beamforming,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 35(1), 98–108 (2016).
27 C. Yoon, H. H. Kim, and K. K. Shung, “Development of a low-complexity, cost-effective
digital beamformer architecture for high-frequency ultrasound imaging,” IEEE Transactions
on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 64(6), 1002–1008 (2017).

21

28 C. A. Samson, A. Bezanson, and J. A. Brown, “A sub-nyquist, variable sampling, highfrequency phased array beamformer,” IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and
frequency control 64(3), 568–576 (2017).
29 N. Nguyen and R. Prager, “Minimum variance approaches to ultrasound pixel-based beamforming,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging (2016).
30 S. Park, A. B. Karpiouk, S. R. Aglyamov, et al., “Adaptive beamforming for photoacoustic
imaging,” Optics letters 33(12), 1291–1293 (2008).
31 M. A. L. Bell, N. Kuo, D. Y. Song, et al., “Short-lag spatial coherence beamforming of photoacoustic images for enhanced visualization of prostate brachytherapy seeds,” Biomedical
optics express 4(10), 1964–1977 (2013).
32 R. S. Bandaru, A. R. Sornes, J. Hermans, et al., “Delay and standard deviation beamforming
to enhance specular reflections in ultrasound imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics,
Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 63(12), 2057–2068 (2016).
33 G. Matrone, A. S. Savoia, G. Caliano, et al., “The delay multiply and sum beamforming
algorithm in ultrasound b-mode medical imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
34(4), 940–949 (2015).
34 H. B. Lim, N. T. T. Nhung, E.-P. Li, et al., “Confocal microwave imaging for breast cancer
detection: Delay-multiply-and-sum image reconstruction algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on
Biomedical Engineering 55(6), 1697–1704 (2008).
35 M. Mozaffarzadeh, A. Mahloojifar, and M. Orooji, “Medical photoacoustic beamforming using minimum variance-based delay multiply and sum,” in SPIE Digital Optical Technologies,
1033522–1033522, International Society for Optics and Photonics (2017).

22

36 M. Mozaffarzadeh, A. Mahloojifar, M. Orooji, et al., “Linear array photoacoustic imaging
using minimum variance-based delay multiply and sum adaptive beamforming algorithm,”
arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.07965 (2017).
37 M. Mozaffarzadeh, A. Mahloojifar, M. Orooji, et al., “Double-stage delay multiply and sum
beamforming algorithm: Application to linear-array photoacoustic imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 65(1), 31–42 (2018).
38 M. Mozaffarzadeh, A. Mahloojifar, and M. Orooji, “Image enhancement and noise reduction
using modified delay-multiply-and-sum beamformer: Application to medical photoacoustic imaging,” in Electrical Engineering (ICEE), 2017 Iranian Conference on, 65–69, IEEE
(2017).
39 M. Mozaffarzadeh, M. Sadeghi, A. Mahloojifar, et al., “Double stage delay multiply and sum
beamforming algorithm applied to ultrasound medical imaging,” Ultrasound in Medicine and
Biology PP(99), 1–1 (2017).
40 S. Mehdizadeh, A. Austeng, T. F. Johansen, et al., “Eigenspace based minimum variance
beamforming applied to ultrasound imaging of acoustically hard tissues,” IEEE transactions
on medical imaging 31(10), 1912–1921 (2012).
41 T. Zhou, Q.-l. Li, X. Chen, et al., “Forward-backward minimum variance beamforming
combined with coherence weighting applied to ultrasound imaging,” in World Congress on
Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering May 26-31, 2012, Beijing, China, 1092–1096,
Springer (2013).
42 M. Mozaffarzadeh, S. A. O. I. Avanji, A. Mahloojifar, et al., “Photoacoustic imaging using

23

combination of eigenspace-based minimum variance and delay-multiply-and-sum beamformers: Simulation study,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.06523 (2017).
43 M. Mozaffarzadeh, A. Mahloojifar, M. Nasiriavanaki, et al., “Eigenspace-based minimum
variance adaptive beamformer combined with delay multiply and sum: Experimental study,”
arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.01767 (2017).
44 M. Mozaffarzadeh, M. Mehrmohammadi, and B. Makkiabadi, “Image improvement in lineararray photoacoustic imaging using high resolution coherence factor weighting technique,”
arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.02751 (2017).
45 K. W. Rigby, “Method and apparatus for coherence filtering of ultrasound images,” (1999).
US Patent 5,910,115.
46 B. E. Treeby and B. T. Cox, “k-wave: Matlab toolbox for the simulation and reconstruction
of photoacoustic wave fields,” Journal of Biomedical Optics 15(2), 021314–021314 (2010).
47 Y. Yan, M. Basij, E. Hemandez-Andrade, et al., “Endocavity ultrasound and photoacoustic imaging system to evaluate fetal brain perfusion and oxygenation: Preliminary ex vivo
studies,” in Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), 2017 IEEE International, 1–1, IEEE (2017).

Moein Mozaffarzadeh was born in Sari, Iran, in 1993. He received the B.Sc.
degree in Electrical Engineering from Babol Noshirvani University of Technology (Mazandaran,
Iran), in 2015, and the M.Sc. degree in Biomedical Engineering from Tarbiat Modares University (Tehran, Iran), in 2017. He is currently a research assistant at research center for biomedical

24

technologies and robotics, institute for advanced medical technologies (Tehran, Iran). His current research interests include Photoacoustic Image Reconstruction, Ultrasound Beamforming and
Biomedical Imaging.

Yan Yan joined Wayne State University since 2015-May as a PhD student in
functional and molecular ultrasound research laboratory (http://ultrasound.eng.wayne.edu/). His
interesting areas are Medical Image, Object Detection and Data Mining. He had strong background in Computer Science pattern recognition and computer graphics. He holds two bachelors,
Computer science and Post and Telecommunication. He also received a master in computer science
from Wayne State university 2017. His current research interests include Endocavity Ultrasound
and Photoacoustic for fetal and maternal care.

Mohammad Mehrmohammadi received his B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from Sharif University of Technology (Tehran, Iran), the M.Sc. in Electrical and Computer
Engineering from Illinois Institute of Technology (Chicago, IL), and the Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin (Austin, TX). He did his postdoctoral fellowship
at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine (Rochester, Minnesota). Currently, he is an assistant professor of Biomedical/Electrical and Computer Engineering at Wayne State University and scientific
member at Karmanos Cancer Institute.

25

Bahador Makkiabadi received his B.Sc. degree in Electronics Engineering
from Shiraz University (Shiraz, Iran), the M.Sc. in Biomedical Engineering from Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran, Iran), and the Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering from University of
Surrey (Guildford, Surrey, UK). Currently, he is working at Research Center for Biomedical Technologies and Robotics (RCBTR), Institute for Advanced Medical Technologies (IAMT), Tehran
University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. His research interests include Blind Source Separation, Advanced Array Signal Processing for Medical Applications and Biomedical Imaging.

List of Figures
1

Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and
(c) DAS+MCF. A linear array and point targets were used for numerical design.
All images are shown with a dynamic range of 60 dB. Noise was added to the
detected signals having a SNR of 50 dB .

2

Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 1 at the depths of (a)
25 mm and (b) 40 mm.

3

Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and
(c) DAS+MCF. A linear array and point targets were used for numerical design.
All images are shown with a dynamic range of 60 dB. Noise was added to the
detected signals having a SNR of 0 dB .
26

4

Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 3 at the depths of (a)
25 mm and (b) 45 mm.

5

Reconstructed images for simulated detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF, (c)
DAS+MCF, (d) DMAS, (e) DMAS+CF and (e) DMAS+MCF. A linear array and
point targets were used for numerical design. All images are shown with a dynamic
range of 70 dB. Noise was added to the detected signals having a SNR of 20 dB .

6

Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 5 at the depths of 45
mm.

7

The schematic of the setup used for the experimental PAI.

8

Reconstructed images for the experimental detected data using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF
and (c) DAS+MCF. A linear array and wire target phantom were used for the experimental design. All images are shown with a dynamic range of 80 dB.

9

Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 8 at the depths of (a)
22 mm and (b) 24 mm.

10

(a) The phantom used for the experiment. (b) The ex vivo imaging setup.

11

Reconstructed ex vivo images using (a) DAS, (b) DAS+CF and (c) DAS+MCF.
A linear-array and the phantom shown in Fig. 10 were used for the experimental
design. All images are shown with a dynamic range of 80 dB.

12

Lateral variations of the reconstructed images shown in Fig. 11 at the depths of (a)
29 mm and (b) 31.3 mm.

List of Tables
1

-6 dB FWHM (mm) values at the different depths.
27

2

SNR (dB) values at the different depths.

3

FWHM (mm) values, in -6 dB, at the two depths of imaging using the experimental
data.

4

SNR (dB) values for the experimental images shown in Fig. 8.

5

SNR (dB) values for the ex vivo images shown in Fig. 11.

28

