MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104967066 · doi:10.1109/icip.2008.4712422

Spect image restoration via Recursive Inverse Filtering constrained by a probabilistic MRI atlas

2008· article· en· W2104967066 on OpenAlexaff
S. Benameur, Max Mignotte, Jean‐Paul Soucy, Jean Meunier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeconvolutionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicComputer visionBrain atlasImage resolutionInverse problemPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D Brain SPECT imagery is a well established functional imaging method which has become a great help to physicians in the diagnosis of several neurological and cerebrovascular diseases. However, mainly due to the effects of attenuation and the scattering of emitted photons, inherent to this imaging process, 3D SPECT images are generally blurred and exhibit poor spatial resolution. This leads to substantial errors in measurements of regional brain blood flow, and therefore in the estimations of brain activity. In order to improve the resolution of these images and then to facilitate their interpretation, we herein propose an original extension of the NAS-RIF (Recursive Inverse Filtering) deconvolution technique proposed by Kundur and Hatzinakos [1]. The proposed extension allows to efficiently integrate, in the deconvolution process, a set of soft constraints given by a probabilistic MRI atlas containing experts's prior knowledge about the spatial localization of the different brain structures (or tissue classes). This extension has three interesting properties ; first it allows to exploit (or fuse) reliable anatomical and (high resolution) geometrical information extracted horn a probabilistic 3D MRI atlas. Second, it allows to incorporate, into the NAS-RIF method, a regularization term which efficiently stabilizes the inverse solution. Third and contrary to multi-modal restoration techniques, it does not require a MRI scan of the patient. This method has been successfully tested on numerous real brain SPECT images (of different patients suffering from epilepsy), yielding promising restoration results.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207