This weekend I debugged the equations in acoustic_basics.md, I didn't read it in details but there seems to be useful notions in that file. I think we should keep it, what do you think ? You can read it if you want, now that the maths are readable ;)
The IMGQ reference is great, very instructive thanks ! I noticed some typos in the text or some equations, also I think some subtitles didn't do their job. I let you check
In the reference about phantoms :
Introduction : "those used by engineers for image quality assesment. For the moment we at echOpen are a lot more interested by that second category." actually this statement is not true, we are not interested in the first category for image quality, but other echtopians are thinking about the questions related to training the practitioners to use the echOpen device. They might be very interested in low-cost recipes for tissue-mimicking phantoms actually !
Maybe you can just say that here we'll focus on the second category because we have needs related to physical measurements
The rest is ok, thanks :) if you get some results from your experiments with agar you could maybe write a paragraph about it
@ApollineF a few remarks :
This weekend I debugged the equations in acoustic_basics.md, I didn't read it in details but there seems to be useful notions in that file. I think we should keep it, what do you think ? You can read it if you want, now that the maths are readable ;)
The IMGQ reference is great, very instructive thanks ! I noticed some typos in the text or some equations, also I think some subtitles didn't do their job. I let you check
In the reference about phantoms :