MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptive phase correction of diffusion-weighted images

2019· article· en· W2980921467 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Pizzolato, Guillaume Gilbert, Jean‐Philippe Thiran, Maxime Descoteaux, Rachid Deriche

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeCARE CanadaPhilips (Canada)
FundersEuropean Research CouncilEuropean CommissionSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDiffusion MRIRegularization (linguistics)PreprocessorMathematicsGaussianImage qualityAlgorithmGaussian noiseArtificial intelligenceRician fadingNoise (video)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Magnetic resonance imagingImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phase correction (PC) is a preprocessing technique that exploits the phase of images acquired in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to obtain real-valued images containing tissue contrast with additive Gaussian noise, as opposed to magnitude images which follow a non-Gaussian distribution, e.g. Rician. PC finds its natural application to diffusion-weighted images (DWIs) due to their inherent low signal-to-noise ratio and consequent non-Gaussianity that induces a signal overestimation bias that propagates to the calculated diffusion indices. PC effectiveness depends upon the quality of the phase estimation, which is often performed via a regularization procedure. We show that a suboptimal regularization can produce alterations of the true image contrast in the real-valued phase-corrected images. We propose adaptive phase correction (APC), a method where the phase is estimated by using MRI noise information to perform a complex-valued image regularization that accounts for the local variance of the noise. We show, on synthetic and acquired data, that APC leads to phase-corrected real-valued DWIs that present a reduced number of alterations and a reduced bias. The substantial absence of parameters for which human input is required favors a straightforward integration of APC in MRI processing pipelines.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207