MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2014333300 · doi:10.1118/1.3244154

Poster - Wed Eve-50: Correcting for Fat-Shift Artifacts in Magnetic Resonance Images

2009· article· en· W2014333300 on OpenAlexaff
LN Baldwin, Keith Wachowicz, B. G. Fallone

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistortion (music)ResidualSIGNAL (programming language)Transformation (genetics)Artificial intelligenceArtifact (error)Computer visionImage processingComputer scienceImage (mathematics)AlgorithmMathematicsChemistryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inclusion of magnetic resonance (MR) images in radiation therapy treatment planning has been hampered by inherent image distortions. As such, distortion correction algorithms have been under investigation for many years. Although distortion maps can be derived through a number of methods, a common problem arises when the resultant distortion transformation is not unique. This situation is present at the interfaces between tissues experiencing different chemical shift environments (i.e. at fat / water boundaries), and leads to hypo- and hyper-intense artifacts in the distorted image. Correcting image distortion by interpolating between true and distorted coordinates cannot fully correct for the erroneous high intensity region because the distortion transformation at such locations is not unique. Thus, residual distortion artifacts remain and may hinder the accurate delineation of areas associated with fat signal, i.e. external body contours. Here we propose a series of image processing steps which are carried out prior to the standard distortion correction procedure. The method involves establishing regions of signal overlap in the distorted image (i.e. where the distortion transformation is not unique) and separating the resultant high signal into the water-based signal component and the shifted fat-based signal component. The fat signal is unshifted prior to the standard distortion correction technique. When the described methods are applied, the residual high-intensity regions associated with the chemical shift artifact can be 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.010

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→