Accelerating quantitative susceptibility and R2* mapping using incoherent undersampling and deep neural network reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and R2* mapping are MRI post-processing methods that quantify tissue magnetic susceptibility and transverse relaxation rate distributions. However, QSM and R2* acquisitions are relatively slow, even with parallel imaging. Incoherent undersampling and compressed sensing reconstruction techniques have been used to accelerate traditional magnitude-based MRI acquisitions; however, most do not recover the full phase signal, as required by QSM, due to its non-convex nature. In this study, a learning-based Deep Complex Residual Network (DCRNet) is proposed to recover both the magnitude and phase images from incoherently undersampled data, enabling high acceleration of QSM and R2* acquisition. Magnitude, phase, R2*, and QSM results from DCRNet were compared with two iterative and one deep learning methods on retrospectively undersampled acquisitions from six healthy volunteers, one intracranial hemorrhage and one multiple sclerosis patients, as well as one prospectively undersampled healthy subject using a 7T scanner. Peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR), structural similarity (SSIM), root-mean-squared error (RMSE), and region-of-interest susceptibility and R2* measurements are reported for numerical comparisons. The proposed DCRNet method substantially reduced artifacts and blurring compared to the other methods and resulted in the highest PSNR, SSIM, and RMSE on the magnitude, R2*, local field, and susceptibility maps. Compared to two iterative and one deep learning methods, the DCRNet method demonstrated a 3.2% to 9.1% accuracy improvement in deep grey matter susceptibility when accelerated by a factor of four. The DCRNet also dramatically shortened the reconstruction time of single 2D brain images from 36-140 seconds using conventional approaches to only 15-70 milliseconds.
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 | 0.000 | 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".