MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952157459 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1512.07947

Sparse Reconstruction of Compressive Sensing MRI using Cross-Domain Stochastically Fully Connected Conditional Random Fields

2015· preprint· en· W2952157459 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Li, Farzad Khalvati, Mohammad Javad Shafiee, Masoom A. Haider, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingComputer scienceMagnetic resonance imagingIterative reconstructionData acquisitionSampling (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionReconstruction algorithmDiffusion MRIImage qualityProcess (computing)Image (mathematics)RadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is a crucial medical imaging technology for the screening and diagnosis of frequently occurring cancers. However image quality may suffer by long acquisition times for MRIs due to patient motion, as well as result in great patient discomfort. Reducing MRI acquisition time can reduce patient discomfort and as a result reduces motion artifacts from the acquisition process. Compressive sensing strategies, when applied to MRI, have been demonstrated to be effective at decreasing acquisition times significantly by sparsely sampling the \emph{k}-space during the acquisition process. However, such a strategy requires advanced reconstruction algorithms to produce high quality and reliable images from compressive sensing MRI. This paper proposes a new reconstruction approach based on cross-domain stochastically fully connected conditional random fields (CD-SFCRF) for compressive sensing MRI. The CD-SFCRF introduces constraints in both \emph{k}-space and spatial domains within a stochastically fully connected graphical model to produce improved MRI reconstruction. Experimental results using T2-weighted (T2w) imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the prostate show strong performance in preserving fine details and tissue structures in the reconstructed images when compared to other tested methods even at low sampling rates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207