MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976118866 · doi:10.1118/1.4887919

SU‐D‐9A‐03: STAMP: Simulator for Texture Analysis in MRI/PET

2014· article· en· W1976118866 on OpenAlexaff
S. Laberge, Martin Vallières, Ives R. Levesque

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceImaging phantomMonte Carlo methodScannerArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMATLABComputer graphics (images)SimulationNuclear medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To develop a convenient simulation platform to facilitate PET/MR image analysis with the prospect of gaining a better understanding of the influence of acquisition parameters on PET/MRI textural features. The simulation platform is demonstrated by showing textural variations of a representative case study using different image acquisition parameters. Methods: The simulation platform is composed of MRI simulators JEMRIS and SIMRI to achieve simulations of customized MRI sequences on sample tumor models. The PET simulator GATE is used to get 2D and 3D Monte Carlo acquisitions of voxelized PET sources using a phantom geometry and a customized scanner architecture. The platform incorporates a series of graphical user interfaces written in Matlab. Two GUIs are used to facilitate communication with the simulation executables installed on a computer cluster. A third GUI is used to collect and display the clinical and simulated images, as well as fused PET/MRI images, and perform computation of textural features. To illustrate the capabilities of this platform, one FDG‐PET and T1‐weighted (T1w) digitized tumor models were generated from clinical images of a soft‐tissue sarcoma patient. Numerically simulated MR images were produced using 3 different echo times (TE) and 5 different repetition times (TR). PET 2D images were simulated using an OSEM algorithm with 1 to 32 iterations and a post‐reconstruction Gaussian filter of 0, 2, 4 or 6 mm width. Results: STAMP was successfully used to produce numerically simulated FDG‐PET and MRI images, and to calculate their corresponding textures. Three typical textures (GLCM‐Contrast, GLSZM‐ZSV and NGTDM‐Coarseness) were found to vary by a range of 45% on average compared to reference scanning conditions in the case of FDG‐PET, and by a range of 40% in the case of T1w MRI. Conclusion: We have successfully developed a Matlab‐based simulation platform to facilitate PET/MRI texture image analysis for outcome prediction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207