MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758395447 · doi:10.4236/ojmi.2017.74014

Application of Sparse-Coding Super-Resolution to 16-Bit DICOM Images for Improving the Image Resolution in MRI

2017· article· en· W2758395447 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Junko Ota, Kensuke Umehara, Naoki Ishimaru, Takayuki Ishida

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Medical Imaging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBicubic interpolationArtificial intelligenceDICOMComputer visionImage qualityImage resolutionInterpolation (computer graphics)Medical imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Linear interpolationImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To improve the image resolution of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), conventional interpolation methods are commonly used to magnify images via various image processing approaches; however, these methods tend to produce artifacts. While super-resolution (SR) schemes have been introduced as an alternative approach to apply medical imaging, previous studies applied SR only to medical images in 8-bit image format. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of sparse-coding super-resolution (ScSR) for improving the image quality of reconstructed high-resolution MR images in 16-bit digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) image format. Materials and Methods: Fifty-nine T1-weighted images (T1), 84 T2-weighted images (T2), 85 fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images, and 30 diffusion-weighted images (DWI) were sampled from The Repository of Molecular Brain Neoplasia Data as testing datasets, and 1307 non-medical images were sampled from the McGill Calibrated Color Image Database as a training dataset. We first trained the ScSR to prepare dictionaries, in which the relationship between low- and high-resolution images was learned. Using these dictionaries, a high-resolution image was reconstructed from a 16-bit DICOM low-resolution image downscaled from the original test image. We compared the image quality of ScSR and 4 interpolation methods (nearest neighbor, bilinear, bicubic, and Lanczos interpolations). For quantitative evaluation, we measured the peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity (SSIM). Results: The PSNRs and SSIMs for the ScSR were significantly higher than those of the interpolation methods for all 4 MRI sequences (PSNR: p p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: ScSR provides significantly higher image quality in terms of enhancing the resolution of MR images (T1, T2, FLAIR, and DWI) in 16-bit DICOM format compared to the interpolation methods.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.333 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207