MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577660281 · doi:10.1109/mmsp.2016.7813392

Robust MRI reconstruction via re-weighted total variation and non-local sparse regression

2016· article· en· W2577660281 on OpenAlexaff
Mingli Zhang, Christian Desrosiers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceRedundancy (engineering)Iterative reconstructionCompressed sensingPattern recognition (psychology)Imaging phantomTotal variation denoisingImage (mathematics)RegressionComputer visionSimilarity (geometry)AlgorithmMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Total variation (TV) based sparsity and non local self-similarity have been shown to be powerful tools for the reconstruction of magnetic resonance (MR) images. However, due to the uniform regularization of gradient sparsity, standard TV approaches often over-smooth edges in the image, resulting in the loss of important details. This paper presents a novel compressed sensing method for the reconstruction of MRI data, which uses a regularization strategy based on re-weighted TV to preserve image edges. This method also leverages the redundancy of non local image patches through the use of a sparse regression model. An efficient strategy based on the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) algorithm is used to recover images with the proposed model. Experimental results on a simulated phantom and real brain MR data show our method to outperform state-of-the-art compressed sensing approaches, by better preserving edges and removing artifacts in the image.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207