MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096486527 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2009.5332777

De-noising of SPECT images via optimal thresholding by wavelets

2009· article· en· W2096486527 on OpenAlexaff
H. Ahmadi Noubari, Ali Fayazi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingNoise reductionWaveletImaging phantomArtificial intelligenceSingle-photon emission computed tomographyNoise (video)Computer scienceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Image qualitySpect imagingReduction (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionImage (mathematics)MathematicsNuclear medicineMedicineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging provides functional information and precise physiological uptake of radioactivity in a patient's body. Although SPECT imaging is considered to be highly useful in oncology, but the low signal to noise ratio (SNR) caused by photon noise, introduces considerable compromise in image quality and reduction of diagnostic accuracy. It is necessary to apply appropriate noise reduction algorithm to improve the quality of acquired images. In this paper we have used wavelet based denoising in which PSNAR criteria were utilized to arrive at an optimum thresholding of the coefficient at wavelet domain. We have used SIMIND software for simulation of SPECT images and generation of images using cylindrical jaszak phantom. The images were acquired using one million counts of 64x64 matrix size. In this research, simulated images were utilized to construct data dependent optimum threshold level of wavelet coefficients We have compared the results of our thresholding scheme with those obtained by some of commonly used standard denoising schemes in which we show the use of commonly used wavelet-based denoising leads to an inferior noise reduction results as compared with our optimally searched and derived thresholding.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207