A k-Space Model of Movement Artefacts: Application to Segmentation Augmentation and Artefact Removal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient movement during the acquisition of magnetic resonance images (MRI) can cause unwanted image artefacts. These artefacts may affect the quality of clinical diagnosis and cause errors in automated image analysis. In this work, we present a method for generating realistic motion artefacts from artefact-free magnitude MRI data to be used in deep learning frameworks, increasing training appearance variability and ultimately making machine learning algorithms such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs) more robust to the presence of motion artefacts. By modelling patient movement as a sequence of randomly-generated, 'demeaned', rigid 3D affine transforms, we resample artefact-free volumes and combine these in k-space to generate motion artefact data. We show that by augmenting the training of semantic segmentation CNNs with artefacts, we can train models that generalise better and perform more reliably in the presence of artefact data, with negligible cost to their performance on clean data. We show that the performance of models trained using artefact data on segmentation tasks on real-world test-retest image pairs is more robust. We also demonstrate that our augmentation model can be used to learn to retrospectively remove certain types of motion artefacts from real MRI scans. Finally, we show that measures of uncertainty obtained from motion augmented CNN models reflect the presence of artefacts and can thus provide relevant information to ensure the safe usage of deep learning extracted biomarkers in a clinical pipeline.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".