MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2072488024 · doi:10.1118/1.4740103

Sci-Thur PM: YIS - 06: Effect of the k-space sampling pattern on the MTF of compressed sensing MRSI

2012· article· en· W2072488024 on OpenAlexaff
AA Heikal, Keith Wachowicz, B. G. Fallone

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomSampling (signal processing)Compressed sensingOptical transfer functionNyquist–Shannon sampling theoremIterative reconstructionImage qualityComputer scienceAlgorithmNyquist frequencyArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPhysicsOpticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compressed Sensing MRSI (CS-MRSI) offers the ability to accelerate MRSI sequences while suffering minimal artifacts compared to conventional fast MRSI techniques. CS-MRSI exploits the inherent sparsity of MRSI images and incoherent artifacts of pseudo-random sub-Nyquist sampling of k-space combined with non-linear reconstruction to produces MRSI images. CS-MRSI can be used as an acceleration tool to decrease the scan time while maintaining acceptable spatial definition or to enable the acquisition of higher resolution scans while minimizing the associated time penalty. In this work we adopt the compressed sensing technique to accelerate a clinically relevant 2-D point resolved spectroscopy sequence. However, the process of weighing the cost and benefit of applying such a fast imaging technique is complicated due to the unique non-linear nature of the reconstruction process and has largely relied on qualitative assessments. Moreover, pseudo-random sub-Nyquist sampling of k-space can have unwanted effects on the modulation transfer function. In this work we set out to quantify the loss in image quality associated with CS-MRSI. We used simulations of a phantom based method to investigate the MTF behaviour of CS-MRSI with regard to different k-space sampling patterns. As expected, the k-space sampling patterns tested were found to have a direct effect on the MTFs. Moreover, limiting the deviation of the resulting k-space sampling pattern from the prescribed probability distribution function had a positive effect on the MTF overall. Not only was low-resolution response improved, but we also noticed an improvement of ∼ 26% in resolution at 0.1 MTF.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.304 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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