Spectral analysis of mammographic images using a multitaper method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Power spectral analysis in radiographic images is conventionally performed using a windowed overlapping averaging periodogram. This study describes an alternative approach using a multitaper technique and compares its performance with that of the standard method. This tool will be valuable in power spectrum estimation of images, whose content deviates significantly from uniform white noise. The performance of the multitaper approach will be evaluated in terms of spectral stability, variance reduction, bias, and frequency precision. The ultimate goal is the development of a useful tool for image quality assurance. METHODS: A multitaper approach uses successive data windows of increasing order. This mitigates spectral leakage allowing one to calculate a reduced-variance power spectrum. The multitaper approach will be compared with the conventional power spectrum method in several typical situations, including the noise power spectra (NPS) measurements of simulated projection images of a uniform phantom, NPS measurement of real detector images of a uniform phantom for two clinical digital mammography systems, and the estimation of the anatomic noise in mammographic images (simulated images and clinical mammograms). RESULTS: Examination of spectrum variance versus frequency resolution and bias indicates that the multitaper approach is superior to the conventional single taper methods in the prevention of spectrum leakage and variance reduction. More than four times finer frequency precision can be achieved with equivalent or less variance and bias. CONCLUSIONS: Without any shortening of the image data length, the bias is smaller and the frequency resolution is higher with the multitaper method, and the need to compromise in the choice of regions of interest size to balance between the reduction of variance and the loss of frequency resolution is largely eliminated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".