xQSM: quantitative susceptibility mapping with octave convolutional and noise‐regularized neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".