MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135042515 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2006.1625071

Mixture principal component analysis for distribution volume parametric imaging in brain PET studies

2006· article· en· W2135042515 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Qiu, Zhu Wang, K. J. Ray Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinnesota Pollution Control Agency
KeywordsVoxelPrincipal component analysisArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Parametric statisticsPositron emission tomographyComputer sciencePreprocessorCluster analysisStatistical parametric mappingProbabilistic logicMathematicsNuclear medicineStatisticsMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a mixture principal component analysis (mPCA)-based approach for voxel level quantification of dynamic positron emission tomography (PET) data in brain studies. The parameters of the probabilistic mixture model are determined using an EM algorithm. The problem of interest here requires neither the accurate arterial blood measurements as the input function nor the existence of a reference region. The effects of mPCA are examined in two different ways on the basis of whether the compartmental model for tracer dynamics is considered. First, the mPCA approach itself is used to classify all voxels into the specific binding and non-specific binding groups, and the resulting power is used for revealing the underlying distribution volume (DV) image. Second, the proposed mPCA-based classification approach is incorporated as the clustering preprocessing into our earlier work to simultaneously estimate the DV parametric image and the input function. The efficiency and superiority of the proposed scheme is demonstrated by real brain PET data.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.322 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207