Improving susceptibility mapping using a threshold‐based K‐space/image domain iterative reconstruction approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve susceptibility quantification, a threshold-based k-space/image domain iterative approach that uses geometric information from the susceptibility map itself as a constraint to overcome the ill-posed nature of the inverse filter is introduced. Simulations were used to study the accuracy of the method and its robustness in the presence of noise. In vivo data were processed and analyzed using this method. Both simulations and in vivo results show that most streaking artifacts inside the susceptibility map caused by the ill-defined inverse filter were suppressed by the iterative approach. In simulated data, the bias toward lower mean susceptibility values inside vessels has been shown to decrease from around 10% to 2% when choosing an appropriate threshold value for the proposed iterative method. Typically, three iterations are sufficient for this approach to converge and this process takes less than 30 s to process a 512×512×256 dataset. This iterative method improves quantification of susceptibility inside vessels and reduces streaking artifacts throughout the brain for data collected from a single-orientation acquisition. This approach has been applied to vessels alone as well as to vessels and other structures with lower susceptibility to generate whole brain susceptibility maps with significantly reduced streaking artifacts.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".