Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thanks to its ability to yield functionally rather than anatomically-based information, the three-dimensional (3-D) SPECT imagery technique has become a great help in the diagnostic of cerebrovascular diseases. Nevertheless, due to the imaging process, the 3-D single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) images are very blurred and, consequently, their interpretation by the clinician is often difficult and subjective. In order to improve the resolution of these 3-D images and then to facilitate their interpretation, we propose herein to extend a recent image blind deconvolution technique (called the nonnegativity support constraint-recursive inverse filtering deconvolution method) in order to improve both the spatial and the interslice resolution of SPECT volumes. This technique requires a preliminary step in order to find the support of the object to be restored. In this paper, we propose to solve this problem with an unsupervised 3-D Markovian segmentation technique. This method has been successfully tested on numerous real and simulated brain SPECT volumes, yielding very 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".