Patch-based image reconstruction for PET using prior-image derived dictionaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In PET image reconstruction, regularization is often needed to reduce the noise in the resulting images. Patch-based image processing techniques have recently been successfully used for regularization in medical image reconstruction through a penalized likelihood framework. Re-parameterization within reconstruction is another powerful regularization technique in which the object in the scanner is re-parameterized using coefficients for spatially-extensive basis vectors. In this work, a method for extracting patch-based basis vectors from the subject's MR image is proposed. The coefficients for these basis vectors are then estimated using the conventional MLEM algorithm. Furthermore, using the alternating direction method of multipliers, an algorithm for optimizing the Poisson log-likelihood while imposing sparsity on the parameters is also proposed. This novel method is then utilized to find sparse coefficients for the patch-based basis vectors extracted from the MR image. The results indicate the superiority of the proposed methods to patch-based regularization using the penalized likelihood framework.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".