Intensity-based 2-D-3-D registration of cerebral angiograms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a new method for aligning three-dimensional (3-D) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) with 2-D X-ray digital subtraction angiograms (DSA). Our method is developed from our algorithm to register computed tomography volumes to X-ray images based on intensity matching of digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs). To make the DSA and DRR more similar, we transform the MRA images to images of the vasculature and set to zero the contralateral side of the MRA to that imaged with DSA. We initialize the search for a match on a user defined circular region of interest. We have tested six similarity measures using both unsegmented MRA and three segmentation variants of the MRA. Registrations were carried out on images of a physical neuro-vascular phantom and images obtained during four neuro-vascular interventions. The most accurate and robust registrations were obtained using the pattern intensity, gradient difference, and gradient correlation similarity measures, when used in conjunction with the most sophisticated MRA segmentations. Using these measures, 95% of the phantom start positions and 82% of the clinical start positions were successfully registered. The lowest root mean square reprojection errors were 1.3 mm (standard deviation 0.6) for the phantom and 1.5 mm (standard deviation 0.9) for the clinical data sets. Finally, we present a novel method for the comparison of similarity measure performance using a technique borrowed from receiver operator characteristic analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".