The influence of radial undersampling schemes on compressed sensing reconstruction in breast MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fast imaging applications in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) frequently involve undersampling of k-space data to achieve the desired temporal resolution. However, high temporal resolution images generated from undersampled data suffer from aliasing artifacts. In radial k-space sampling, this manifests as undesirable streaks that obscure image detail. Compressed sensing reconstruction has been shown to reduce such streak artifacts, based on the assumption of image sparsity. Here, compressed sensing is implemented with three different radial sampling schemes (golden-angle, bit-reversed, and random sampling), which are compared over a range of spatiotemporal resolutions. The sampling methods are implemented in static scenarios where different undersampling patterns could be compared. Results from point spread function studies, simulations, phantom and in vivo experiments show that the choice of radial sampling pattern influences the quality of the final image reconstructed by the compressed sensing algorithm. While evenly undersampled radial trajectories are best for specific temporal resolutions, golden-angle radial sampling results in the least overall error when various temporal resolutions are considered. Reduced temporal fluctuations from aliasing artifacts in golden-angle sampling translates to improved compressed sensing reconstructions overall.
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 | 0.018 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".