Multi-Tissue Decomposition of Diffusion MRI Signals via L0 Sparse-Group Estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sparse estimation techniques are widely utilized in diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (DMRI). In this paper, we present an algorithm for solving the ℓ0sparse-group estimation problem and apply it to the tissue signal separation problem in DMRI. Our algorithm solves the ℓ0problem directly, unlike existing approaches that often seek to solve its relaxed approximations. We include the mathematical proofs showing that the algorithm will converge to a solution satisfying the firstorder optimality condition within a finite number of iterations. We apply this algorithm to DMRI data to tease apart signal contributions from white matter, gray matter, and cerebrospinal fluid with the aim of improving the estimation of the fiber orientation distribution function (FODF). Unlike spherical deconvolution approaches that assume an invariant fiber response function (RF), our approach utilizes an RF group to span the signal subspace of each tissue type, allowing greater flexibility in accounting for possible variations of the RF throughout space and within each voxel. Our ℓ0algorithm allows for the natural groupings of the RFs to be considered during signal decomposition. Experimental results confirm that our method yields estimates of FODFs and volume fractions of tissue compartments with improved robustness and accuracy. Our ℓ0algorithm is general and can be applied to sparse estimation problems beyond the scope of this paper.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".