Non-parametric Bayesian estimation of apparent diffusion coefficient from diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A promising approach to prostate cancer diagnosis is multi-parametric MRI. One of the key modalities used in multi-parametric MRI is diffusion weighted MRI. Using multiple diffusion weighted MR acquisitions taken with different magnetic gradient strengths, the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) is calculated and can be used to identify tumors in the prostate. Current algorithms used to calculate ADC assume a parametric measurement model, but this assumption is not true due to the presence of additional phenomena during the acquisition process. A novel Non-parametric Estimated ADC (NEstA) algorithm is proposed which uses a Monte Carlo strategy to learn the inherent measurement distribution model based on the underlying statistical behavior of the DWI measurements to estimate the ADC values. The proposed algorithm is compared to the results of the commonly used least-squares (LS) estimation algorithm for computing ADC values. Nine test patient cases with visible tumors in the prostate gland were processed using both algorithms and compared visually. It was found that NEstA produced ADC data with reduced artifacts while preserving structure. Quantitatively, Fisher's criterion measuring the separability of the healthy prostate and tumor tissues was computed for the nine patient cases, comparing the NEstA and LS methods. It was found that Fisher's criterion increased with the NEstA method, meaning the separation of classes was more pronounced.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".