Patent Publication Number: US-2020297326-A1

Title: Testing system for ultrasonic imaging system

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
     This application generally relates to ultrasound systems and, more particularly, to the testing of ultrasound systems. 
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     Transmission of pressure waves such as acoustic radiation toward a target and reception of the scattered radiation may be managed by a modern acoustic-imaging system, which may take a variety of forms. For instance, acoustic imaging is an important technique that may be used at different acoustic frequencies for varied applications that range from medical imaging to nondestructive testing of structures. The techniques generally rely on the fact that different structures have different acoustic impedances, allowing characterization of structures and their interfaces from information embodied by the different scattering patterns that result. While most applications use radiation reflected from structures, some techniques also make use of information in transmitted patterns. 
     For example, many modern systems are based on multiple-element array transducers that may have linear, curved-linear, phased-array or similar characteristics, and which may be embodied in an acoustic probe. Summing the contributions of the multiple transducer elements comprised by a transducer array allows images to be formed. It is sometimes desired to analyze certain portions of received pressure waves relative to other portions of pressure waves. In the case of ultrasound probes, for instance, the failure of a small number of elements in a given array, or a few defective receive channels in the acoustic system itself, may not be readily perceptible to users because of the averaging effect of summing many elements to form an acoustic beam. But the failure of even a small number of elements or receive channels can significantly degrade the performance of acoustic imaging systems, notably in certain modes of operation like those known as “Doppler” or “near-field” imaging modes. 
     Materials which closely mimic the ultrasonic propagation characteristics of human tissue are employed in imaging “phantoms” for use in testing ultrasound systems. These phantoms may be used to carry out performance checks on ultrasound scanners. Phantoms may also be used for training or testing student technologists in the operation of ultrasound scanners or the interpretation of ultrasound images produced by such scanners. For instance, ultrasound phantoms embodying the desired features for mimicking soft tissue may be prepared from a mixture of gelatin, water, n-propanol and graphite powder, with a preservative; a mixture of oil and gelatin; or the like. The mixture may be admitted into a container in such a way as to exclude air bubbles from forming in the container. In addition to the tissue mimicking material itself, scattering particles, spaced sufficiently close to each other such that an ultrasound scanner is incapable of resolving individual scattering particles, and testing spheres or other targets (e.g., to simulate in situ structures within the human body), may be located within the phantom container (e.g., suspended in the tissue mimicking material body). 
     For example, it is often desirable to have zones within a phantom which mimic the ultrasound characteristics of vessels, cysts or tumors found in the human body. To this end, thin walled, semi-rigid plastic tubing can be inserted within the foam material to mimic the ultrasound characteristics of vessels or sacs. Such an ultrasound phantom is useful in evaluating the ability of ultrasound medical diagnostic scanners to resolve target objects of selected sizes located throughout the tissue mimicking material. The objective is for the ultrasound scanner to accurately resolve the testing spheres or other targets from the background material and scattering particles. 
     In use, a testing technician (e.g., biomedical engineer) may initially grasp a probe of an ultrasound system and then do a free-hand alignment of the probe to the targets contained within the phantom. The ultrasound system may then be operated to obtain one or more images of the inside of the phantom and such images may be visually compared by the technician to one or more reference images (e.g., printed on outside of the phantom) to determine whether the probe is working well enough for use on a patient. 
     SUMMARY 
     Existing manners of testing ultrasound systems with tissue mimicking phantoms are largely dependent on the biomedical engineer&#39;s (or other highly skilled technician&#39;s) ability to accurately align the probe in various manners (e.g., in relation to location on the phantom; pitch, roll, and yaw; etc.) with one or more particular areas on the phantom and to compare the obtained images with the reference image(s). In addition to the inherent subjectivity present in this arrangement, however, the number of people available to conduct such testing is limited as such technicians are typically required to possess biomedical engineering degrees or equivalent. Additionally, reference image(s) printed on the outside of the phantom are generic representations of the intended target placement and content and thus deviations in manufacturing can create misalignment between the image and the actual contents. Still further, detailed records of the images obtained during testing and comparison results are typically not produced; very often, stored records merely include printed screen captures from the ultrasound system placed into a physical storage location. 
     In view of at least the foregoing, the inventors have determined that an objective solution that is repeatable by multiple users with reduced alignment requirements and with digital record storage is needed. Broadly, disclosed herein is a system for use in testing ultrasound systems that includes a tissue mimicking phantom and computer-readable instructions that are configured to automatically compare (e.g., on a pixel by pixel basis) images of the phantom obtained by the ultrasound system to one or more reference images (e.g., indicating how the obtained images should appear) and provide output that assists personnel in assessing the accuracy or correctness of the ultrasound system. Modern manufacturing techniques may be used to place precise structures inside of the phantom to allow for both passive and active evaluation of the probe and its constituent pieces in a manner previously unattainable. Known structure geometry, measured probe output, and injected signals of a known magnitude may be incorporated. 
     In one arrangement, any appropriate digital recording device may be used to digitally store signals received from one or more outputs of the ultrasound system (e.g., SVGA, HDMI, etc.) for use by an image comparison or analysis module on a real-time basis or after full acquisition of the phantom images. In one variation, the phantom may include a mechanically keyed probe-specific probe holder that will allow the rapid and precise alignment between the probe and the phantom. More specifically, the holder may be positioned relative to the surface of the phantom and the various structures inside the phantom such that when the probe is seated in the holder, the probe is automatically positioned in an optimal manner relative to the phantom for use in obtaining images thereof. 
     Advantages of the disclosed system include substantial removal of the inherent subjectivity in existing manners of obtaining tissue mimicking phantom measurements, an increase in user to user testing comparability and in the pool of available testing personnel, a reduction in the number of false-positive and false-negative test results that are caused by faulty equipment, the digitization of testing records to create opportunities for testing to be performed quickly on a daily or even a case-by-case basis. 
     In one aspect, a method for use in assessing a performance of an ultrasound system includes receiving, at a processor from an ultrasound system under test, one or more input images of a tissue mimicking phantom, the image(s) containing a digital representation of the tissue mimicking phantom; determining one or more characteristic data values from the one or more input images; automatically identifying, by the processor, one or more corresponding respective reference data values from a database of reference data based on previously-obtained reference images of the phantom; analyzing, by the processor, the one or more characteristic data values in view of the one or more corresponding respective reference data values; and generating, by the processor, result data based on the analyzing step, wherein the result data indicates a performance of the ultrasound system under test. 
     In another aspect, a system, includes a tissue mimicking phantom including a plurality of objects disposed within a tissue mimicking material; an ultrasound system including a) an ultrasonic probe that is configured to generate and receive ultrasonic waves reflect from the plurality of objects and b) an imaging console that is configured to process the received ultrasonic waves to generate digitized image signals; and a testing controller that is configured to process characteristic data describing the digitized image signals against corresponding characteristic data describing one or more corresponding reference image signals to generate result data indicative of a performance of the ultrasound system. 
     A further understanding of the nature and advantages of the present invention may be realized by reference to the remaining portions of the specification and the drawings, wherein like reference labels are used through the several drawings to refer to similar components. In some instances, reference labels are followed with a hyphenated sublabel; reference to only the primary portion of the label is intended to refer collectively to all reference labels that have the same primary label but different sublabel s. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         FIG. 1  is a block diagram of an ultrasonic imaging system. 
         FIG. 2  is a perspective view of an imaging phantom according to an embodiment. 
         FIG. 3  is a perspective view of another imaging phantom according to an embodiment. 
         FIG. 4  is a schematic diagram including a testing system for use in testing performance of an ultrasonic imaging system with an imaging phantom. 
         FIG. 5  is a schematic diagram of a map of reference image objects for use with the testing system of  FIG. 4 . 
         FIG. 6  is a schematic diagram of one of the reference image objects of  FIG. 5 . 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     Disclosed herein is a system for testing performance characteristics of ultrasound systems that substantially removes the inherent subjectivity in existing manners of obtaining tissue mimicking phantom measurements, increases the pool of available testing personnel, reduces the number of false-positive and false-negative test results that are caused by faulty equipment, and digitizes testing records to create opportunities for testing to be performed quickly on a daily or even a case-by-case basis. Before discussing the testing system in more detail, reference is made to  FIG. 1  which presents a block diagram of one type of ultrasonic imaging system  100  with which the testing system disclosed herein may be utilized. Broadly, the system  100  may include an imaging console  104  and an ultrasonic transducer  108  (e.g., transducer head) that is electrically interconnectable to the imaging console  104  by any appropriate cable assembly  112  and a connector or connector assembly  116 , where the connector assembly  116  is configured to interface with a corresponding port  120  on the imaging console  104 . The imaging console  104  may transmit a drive signal to the ultrasonic transducer  108  to cause piezoelectric elements  128  of the ultrasonic transducer  108  to transmit acoustic waves (e.g., ultrasound, ultrasonic waves) to a subject. The ultrasonic transducer  108  may be configured to receive reflection waves reflected by the interior of the subject and pass the same to the imaging console  104  for generation of one or more corresponding images. The ultrasonic transducer  108 , cable assembly  112  and connector  116  may be referred to as an “acoustic probe,” “ultrasonic probe” or “ultrasound transducer.” 
     The ultrasonic transducer  108  may include any appropriate array  124  of piezoelectric elements  128  (e.g., linear, curved linear, etc.) that transmit ultrasonic waves towards a subject area, where summing the contributions of the multiple piezoelectric elements  128  allows images to be formed by the console  104  or other computer system. The ultrasonic transducer  108  may also include any appropriate acoustic lens  132  (e.g., layer of rubber-like material) that covers the array  124  to provide electrical safety, acoustic focusing, impedance matching, disinfection, and sealing of the ultrasonic transducer  108 . While not shown, the ultrasonic transducer  108  may also include one or more other components such as backing layers, electrical contacts, and the like. The connector assembly  116  may include any appropriate housing (e.g., shield, casing, etc.) as well as an array  136  of electrical contacts  140  (e.g., pins, pads, flat surfaces, etc.) that are configured to electrically connect the multiple piezoelectric elements  128  to the imaging console  104 . 
     Broadly, the imaging console  104  may be in the form of a housing including any appropriate arrangement of circuitry, components, and the like to receive inputs, generate corresponding drive signals to be transmitted to the piezoelectric elements  128  of the ultrasonic transducer  108  over cable assembly  112  and via the respective contacts  140  of the connector assembly  116  electrically interfaced with the imaging console  104 . For instance, the imaging console  104  may include a control section (not shown) including any appropriate arrangement of processing units (e.g., processing cores, CPUs, etc.), memory (e.g., volatile memory such as random access memory or the like), storage (e.g., non-volatile such as hard disk, flash, etc.), etc. for purposes of operating each section of the ultrasonic imaging system  100  in conjunction with one or more developed programs or code portions (e.g., by way of the processing unit(s) executing one or more computer readable instruction sets in memory). The imaging console  104  may also include (or be in connection with) any appropriate operational input section (e.g., including switches, buttons, keyboard, etc.) in communication with the control section, a transmission section (e.g., circuitry) configured to transmit drive signals to the ultrasonic transducer  108  based on signals received from the control section, a receiving section (e.g., circuitry) configured to receive ultrasound reception signals under control of the control section, and one or more displays configured to display ultrasonic images of the subject under control of the control section. Various additional details of the imaging console  104  have been omitted from this discussion in the interest of brevity. 
     As discussed herein, tissue mimicking phantoms are often utilized as part of testing various performance characteristics of ultrasound and other imaging systems. In this regard,  FIG. 2  presents one example of a phantom  200  with which the testing system disclosed herein may be utilized. Broadly, the phantom  200  includes a container  212  having a bottom  214  and walls  215  such as opposed faces  216  and opposed ends  218  to generally form a hollow, box-like container structure. Margins of the walls  215  remote from the bottom  214  may define a window  220  that may be closed with an ultrasound-transmitting window cover  222  made of any appropriate cohesive ultrasound transmitting material of suitable physical durability. 
     A body  224  of any appropriate tissue-mimicking material(s) may generally fill the container  212  up to the level of the window  220 . In one arrangement, the body  224  may include several distinct sections  225 ,  226 , and  227  of tissue-mimicking material to mimic the ultrasound properties of several corresponding body tissues. Although the sections  225 ,  226 , and  227  are illustrated as rectangular blocks in contact with each other, they may also be formed of other shapes, such as shapes simulating human body structures. While not shown, various structures (e.g., tubing, spheres, etc.) may be positioned within the tissue-mimicking material(s) in various manners to simulate internal structures of the human body that may interact with and reflect transmitted ultrasonic waves for use in testing the performance of an ultrasound system (e.g., that of  FIG. 1 ). While also not shown in  FIG. 2 , one or more reference images indicative of such internal structures may be printed on an outside of the phantom  200  or otherwise made available (e.g., on a display screen) for use by testing personnel in analyzing images of the internal structures obtained by the ultrasound system. 
       FIG. 3  presents another embodiment of an imaging phantom  300  that includes one or more reference images printed on an outside thereof to assist testing personnel in analyzing received ultrasound images. Various quality assurance and/or quality control “B-mode” (two-dimensional) parameters may be measured such as but not limited to image uniformity; depth of penetration; axial, lateral and elevational resolution; near field/dead zone; lesion detectability; high contrast (e.g., anechoic objects); low contrast (e.g., gray scale objects); and the like. Three-dimensional parameters (e.g., volume, reconstruction accuracy, etc.) and doppler parameters (e.g., flow rate, system sensitivity, directional discrimination, location of flow, maximum penetration, etc.) may also be measured. In any case, one or more of such measurements obtained by the ultrasound system may be compared to one or more corresponding reference measurements or ranges to determine whether the ultrasound system is operating in an acceptable manner. 
     As noted herein, existing manners of testing performance of ultrasound systems using phantoms require skilled technicians (e.g., biomedical engineers) to subjectively align the ultrasonic transducer with one or more particular portions on the phantom, obtain corresponding images of the interior of the phantom (e.g., on a display of or interconnected with the ultrasound system), and then visually compare the obtained images to one or more reference images physically printed onto the phantom (e.g., reference images  304  in  FIG. 3 ) to determine whether the probe is working well enough for use on a patient. However, these procedures are highly dependent on the biomedical engineer&#39;s (or other highly skilled technician&#39;s) ability to accurately align the probe in various manners (e.g., in relation to location on the phantom; pitch, roll, and yaw; etc.) with one or more particular areas on the phantom and to compare the obtained images with the reference image(s) which can introduce uncertainty into the determined results, among other shortcomings. 
     In this regard,  FIG. 4  presents a schematic diagram of a testing system  400  that may be used to receive digitized image signals  504  from an ultrasound system  500  (e.g., system  100  of  FIG. 1 ) and analyze the received digitized image signals  504  in view of reference data  404  to automatically generate result data  408  that conveys various performance characteristics of the ultrasound system  500 . The testing system  400  may broadly be in the form of one or more computing devices or the like that include(s) a processor  412  (e.g., one or more processing cores, CPUs, etc.), memory  416  (e.g., volatile memory such as random access memory or the like), storage  420  (e.g., non-volatile such as hard disk, flash, etc.), a display  424 , and the like, among other components that are not illustrated in the interest of brevity. 
     A set of any appropriate reference measurement data  404  specific to the particular phantom  600  being utilized may be initially obtained and stored in storage  420  in any appropriate manner (e.g., csv, table, relational database, etc.). For instance, a known “acceptable” probe  508  (e.g., a probe that is known in any appropriate manner to be functioning properly) may be initially used to obtain one or more reference images of the phantom  600  in any appropriate manner. From the reference image(s), one or more various types of reference measurement data  404  may be determined (e.g., calculated, deduced) such as pixel intensity, edge detection, image uniformity, image differential analyses, contrast and brightness, cross-sectional comparative analyses, and/or the like. 
     In one arrangement, a plurality of reference images of the phantom  600  may be obtained for generating a “map”  700  (e.g., see  FIGS. 5 and 6 ) of reference image objects  702  (e.g., data structures) against which subsequently obtained images of the phantom  600  with probes  508  to be tested may be compared for use in determining the suitability of such probes  508  as discussed in more detail below. For instance, an operator may be initially instructed by the system  400  to obtain a plurality of reference images  704  of the phantom  600  from numerous (e.g., dozens, hundreds, etc.) points or locations about the phantom  600  and/or under a variety of other operating conditions as part of generating the map  700 . Examples of operating conditions may include one or more of physical orientations and attitudes between the probe  508  of the ultrasound system and the phantom  600 , ultrasound frequency wavelength, ultrasound intensity, ultrasound time-domain characteristics, ultrasound frequency-domain characteristics, and signal processing methodologies. 
     For each reference image  704  in the map  700 , the analyzer  428  may be configured to identify the particular set  708  of operating conditions under which the reference image was obtained as well as the reference measurement data  712  (e.g.,  404  from  FIG. 4 ) corresponding to the reference image  704  and then store or otherwise associate the same as a respective reference image object  702 . In the case where the reference image  704 , its respective set  708  of operating conditions, and its respective reference measurement data  712  are stored in different respective portions of the storage  420  or memory  416 , such data portions may be respectively indexed or linked by way of keys, identifiers, and/or the like for access by the analyzer  428 . For instance, in the case where the analyzer identifies the set  712  of operating conditions of a particular reference image object  702  in a particular analysis, the analyzer  428  may have ready access to the corresponding reference measurement data  712  associated with the identified set  712  of operating conditions. 
     To test a probe  508  of the ultrasound system  500 , a testing technician (e.g., biomedical engineer) may position the probe  508  over a scanning surface of the phantom  600  (e.g., over window  220  of phantom  200  of  FIG. 2 ) and obtain one or more images (e.g., each in the nature of a digital representation of one or more portions of the phantom  600 ) of various targets contained within the phantom  600 . The digitized image signals  504  generated by a console  512  of the ultrasound system  500  may then be transmitted in any appropriate manner to the testing system  400  whereupon the received signals  504  may be analyzed to generate the result data  408 . 
     As shown, the testing system  400  may include one or more testing routines  432  that are broadly configured to dictate how the ultrasound system  500  is to be operated during the scanning of the phantom  600 . In one arrangement, the testing routines  432  may be in the nature of a set of instructions that may be presented on the display  424  and that indicate to the testing technician one or more specific manners in which the ultrasound system is to be operated to obtain images of the targets inside the phantom  600  for use by an analyzer  428  (e.g., controller) as discussed herein. For instance, the displayed instructions may instruct the technician to operate the ultrasound system  500  at one or more particular frequencies or amplitudes, for one or more particular periods of time, etc. In another arrangement, the testing routines  432  may be configured to automatically control the ultrasound system  500  (e.g., via control signals and data  505 ) to operate the same at one or more particular frequencies or amplitudes, for one or more periods of time, etc. (e.g., by virtue of the processor  412  loading the routines  432  into memory  416  and triggering the ultrasound system  500  to operate in such manner(s) by way of any appropriate wired or wireless connection). 
     In any case, the processor  412  may be configured to execute an analyzer  428  (e.g., set(s) of computer readable instructions) that is operable to analyze the digitized image signals  504  received from the ultrasound system  500  (e.g., by way of any appropriate wired or wireless connection) and reference measurement data  404  obtained from storage  420  to generate result data  408  that may be presented on the display  424  in any appropriate manner. The displayed result data  408  is configured to convey a relative level of performance of the ultrasound system  500  (e.g., of the probe  508  under test) in relation to a wide variety of operating parameters. 
     Broadly, the analyzer  428  may be configured to measure any appropriate characteristic data  402  (e.g., data values) from the received digitized image signals  504  and store the same in storage  420 . For instance, representative types of characteristic data  402  may include pixel intensity, edge detection, image uniformity, image differential analysis, contrast and brightness, and cross-sectional comparative analyses of the images. Each respective measured characteristic data  402  may be respectively analyzed in view of corresponding reference characteristic data  404  to determine whether the measured characteristic data  402  tends to indicate that the probe  508  is functioning properly. In one arrangement, the analyzer  428  may automatically compare an absolute value of measured characteristic data  402  to an absolute value of corresponding reference characteristic data  404 , where the absolute value may be associated with any appropriate tolerances such that the measured characteristic data  402  being at the absolute value or within the tolerances may tend to indicate that the measured characteristic data  402  is acceptable. As discussed herein, such comparison may be conducted on a pixel by pixel basis or on a region-by-region basis (a region being a collection of pixels), where the measured characteristic data  402  (e.g., pixel intensity, color, etc. or region metric) of each respective pixel or region of the obtained image data  504  may be compared to the corresponding reference characteristic data  404  (e.g., pixel intensity, color, etc. or region metric) of the same or related pixel or region in the reference image. 
     Additionally or alternatively, the analyzer  428  may automatically compare each measured characteristic data  402  to an acceptable range of values of the corresponding reference characteristic data  404  for purposes of making a determination as to the acceptability of the particular measured characteristic data  402 . The disclosed tolerances and/or ranges may vary as appropriate depending on the particular type of probe  508  being utilized, the particular type of phantom  600  being utilized, other operating conditions, and/or the like. In one variation, the analyzer  428  may implement any appropriate logic or the like to indicate a degree to which the measured characteristic data  402  represents acceptable data. 
     In one arrangement, the analyzer  428  may measure the degree of image uniformity in the obtained image data  504  and utilize the same as a metric for overall performance analysis. In another arrangement, the analyzer  428  may correlate the degree of overall image performance to a minimum number of measured characteristic data  402  that is considered acceptable. In some situations, the analyzer  428  may utilize image convolution to match the measured characteristic data  402  to the reference characteristic data  404 . For instance, performing convolution on the obtained image data  504  (or measured characteristic data  402 ) to more closely match a reference image (or the reference characteristic data  404 ) could be employed to compensate the obtained image to a point where it can be adequately compared to the reference image. In this regard, subsequent comparisons or analyses may be performed using other techniques disclosed herein. 
     In one embodiment, the analyzer  428  may implement feature extraction of the obtained image data  504  to obtain the measured characteristic data  402  for use in comparison to or analysis in view of the reference characteristic data  404 . Specifically, such feature extraction may generally involve identifying measurable properties or characteristics to derive feature values from the obtained image data  504 , where such features are intended to be more manageable, informative, and readily processed in comparative analyses. Each derived feature may be compared to corresponding reference features to determine whether the derived feature is “acceptable” and thus whether it tends to indicate the acceptability of the obtained image data  402 . For instance, such feature extraction may include edge detection, image subtraction, template matching, and/or the like. 
     As discussed previously, the disclosed system  400  may instruct a testing technician as to the specific operating conditions under which images of the phantom  600  are to be obtained (e.g., in relation to physical orientations and attitudes between the probe  508  of the ultrasound system and the phantom  600 , ultrasound frequency wavelength, ultrasound intensity, ultrasound time-domain characteristics, ultrasound frequency-domain characteristics, and signal processing methodologies). In other arrangements, however, the disclosed system  400  may provide little to no guidance to the testing technician as to any particular operating conditions for use in testing of the probe  508 . In other words, once the system  400  is primed and ready to accept new images of probes under test for use in analysis, the system  400  may be configured to accept a wide variety of images of the probe under test under a wide variety of operating conditions for use in conducting an analysis of the proble  508 . 
     For instance, the analyzer  428  may be configured to automatically determine one or more operating conditions under which the obtained image was taken and then identify a corresponding previously obtained reference image in the map having the same or similar operating conditions (e.g., set  708  of operating conditions of a particular reference image object  702  in the map  700  of  FIGS. 5-6 ). As one simplistic example, the operating conditions of the particular obtained image may be considered the “same” as those of a particular one of the reference image objects  702  if they are within a particular percentage or range of those of the reference image object  702 . As a more complex example, the various operating conditions may be assessed as part of any appropriate similarity or distance analysis to determine whether the operating conditions of the obtained image are “close enough” to the operating conditions of a particular one of the reference image objects  702  such that the operating conditions of the particular reference image object  702  are considered the same as those of the obtained image (e.g., are considered to be common operating conditions). 
     Upon identifying at least one corresponding reference image object  702 , the analyzer may then be configured to compare the measured characteristic data  402  of the obtained images to the corresponding reference measurement data  712  of the at least one identified reference image object  702  in one or more of the manners discussed herein to determine an “acceptability” of the probe  508  (or ultrasound system  500 ) under test. The comparison and/or other analyses performed by the analyzer may be conducted on a pixel by pixel level, within regions (collections of multiple pixels, contiguous or non-contiguous), in relation to the images as a whole, and/or the like. During and/or upon a conclusion of any of the aforementioned analyses, the analyzer  428  may transform the results to a format appropriate for display and present the results  410  of the one or more analyses on the display  424  or the like in any appropriate manner. In one arrangement, the results may be presented in the nature of a simple “pass/fail” in relation to either each of the measured characteristic data  402  or in relation to the probe  508  as a whole. In some situations, the actual measured characteristic data  402  may not be presented on the display  424  or even made available to the technician or the like. 
     In some arrangements, physical placement of the probe  508  in relation to the phantom  600  for testing of the probe  508  may be dictated in any appropriate manner. For instance, one or more fixtures, markers, etc. may be included (e.g., on the phantom  600 ) to indicate to the operator one or more specific manners in which the probe  508  is to be positioned relative to the phantom  600  to facilitate accurate repeatability of probe testing. As discussed previously herein, the phantom in one variation may include a mechanically keyed probe-specific probe holder that will allow the rapid and precise alignment between the probe and the phantom. 
     It will be readily appreciated that many deviations may be made from the specific embodiments disclosed in the specification without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. The illustrations and discussion herein have only been provided to assist the reader in understanding the various aspects of the present disclosure. For instance, while the probe  508  and console  512  have been illustrated in  FIG. 4  as separate entities, the probe  508  and console  512  could also be embodied in a single entity or in multiple entities. Furthermore, one or more various combinations of the arrangements and embodiments disclosed herein are also envisioned. 
     Embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented as one or more software or computer program products, i.e., one or more modules of computer program instructions encoded on a computer-readable medium for execution by, or to control the operation of, data processing apparatus (processors, cores, etc.). The computer-readable medium can be a machine-readable storage device, a machine-readable storage substrate, a memory device, a composition of matter affecting a machine-readable propagated signal, or a combination of one or more of them. In addition to hardware, software that creates an execution environment for the computer program in question may be provided, e.g., software that constitutes processor firmware, a protocol stack, a database management system, an operating system, or a combination of one or more of them. 
     A computer program (also known as a program, software, software application, script, or code) used to provide the functionality described herein can be written in any form of programming language, including compiled or interpreted languages, and it can be deployed in any form, including as a stand-alone program or as a module, component, subroutine, or other unit suitable for use in a computing environment. A computer program does not necessarily correspond to a file in a file system. A program can be stored in a portion of a file that holds other programs or data (e.g., one or more scripts stored in a markup language document), in a single file dedicated to the program in question, or in multiple coordinated files (e.g., files that store one or more modules, sub-programs, or portions of code). A computer program can be deployed to be executed on one computer or on multiple computers that are located at one site or distributed across multiple sites and interconnected by a communication network. 
     While this disclosure contains many specifics, these should not be construed as limitations on the scope of the disclosure or of what may be claimed, but rather as descriptions of features specific to particular embodiments of the disclosure. Certain features that are described in this specification in the context of separate embodiments can also be implemented in combination in a single embodiment. Conversely, various features that are described in the context of a single embodiment can also be implemented in multiple embodiments separately or in any suitable subcombination. Moreover, although features may be described above as acting in certain combinations and even initially claimed as such, one or more features from a claimed combination can in some cases be excised from the combination, and the claimed combination may be directed to a subcombination or variation of a subcombination.