Pyramidal flux in an anisotropic diffusion scheme for enhancing structures in 3D images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pyramid based methods in image processing provide a helpful framework for accelerating the propagation of information over large spatial domains, increasing the efficiency for large scale applications. Combined with an anisotropic diffusion scheme tailored to preserve the boundaries at a given level, an efficient way for enhancing large structures in 3D images is presented. In our approach, the partial differential equation defining the evolution of the intensity in the image is solved in an explicit scheme at multiple resolutions in an ascending-descending cycle. Intensity 'flux' between distant voxels is allowed, while preserving borders relative to the scale. Experiments have been performed both with phantoms and with real data from 3D Transrectal Ultrasound Imaging. The effectiveness of the method to remove speckle noise and to enhance large structures such as the prostate has been demonstrated. For instance, using two scales reduces the computation time by 87% as compared to a single scale. Furthermore, we show that the boundaries of the prostate are mainly preserved, by comparing with manually outlined edges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".