MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116759256 · doi:10.1002/nbm.4461

xQSM: quantitative susceptibility mapping with octave convolutional and noise‐regularized neural networks

2020· article· en· W3116759256 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNMR in Biomedicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersQueensland Brain InstituteAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of MelbourneCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of QueenslandNational Imaging Facility
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceDeep learningConvolutional neural networkComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Quantitative susceptibility mappingImaging phantomMean squared errorMathematicsPhysicsMagnetic resonance imagingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) provides a valuable MRI contrast mechanism that has demonstrated broad clinical applications. However, the image reconstruction of QSM is challenging due to its ill‐posed dipole inversion process. In this study, a new deep learning method for QSM reconstruction, namely xQSM, was designed by introducing noise regularization and modified octave convolutional layers into a U‐net backbone and trained with synthetic and in vivo datasets, respectively. The xQSM method was compared with two recent deep learning (QSMnet + and DeepQSM) and two conventional dipole inversion (MEDI and iLSQR) methods, using both digital simulations and in vivo experiments. Reconstruction error metrics, including peak signal‐to‐noise ratio, structural similarity, normalized root mean squared error and deep gray matter susceptibility measurements, were evaluated for comparison of the different methods. The results showed that the proposed xQSM network trained with in vivo datasets achieved the best reconstructions of all the deep learning methods. In particular, it led to, on average, 32.3%, 25.4% and 11.7% improvement in the accuracy of globus pallidus susceptibility estimation for digital simulations and 39.3%, 21.8% and 6.3% improvements for in vivo acquisitions compared with DeepQSM, QSMnet + and iLSQR, respectively. It also exhibited the highest linearity against different susceptibility intensity scales and demonstrated the most robust generalization capability to various spatial resolutions of all the deep learning methods. In addition, the xQSM method also substantially shortened the reconstruction time from minutes using MEDI to only a few seconds.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · 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