MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209723791 · doi:10.1109/trpms.2021.3123537

A 4-D Iterative HYPR Denoising Operator Improves PET Image Quality

2021· article· en· W3209723791 on OpenAlexafffund
Connor Bevington, Ju-Chieh Cheng, Vesna Sossi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilTRIUMF
KeywordsNoise reductionComputer scienceOperator (biology)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionImage qualityNoise (video)Feature (linguistics)Contrast (vision)Image resolutionIterative methodAlgorithmImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing demand for high spatial and/or temporal resolution dynamic PET images in research and clinical settings. Such images often have a low number of acquired counts per voxel, leading to poor signal-to-noise ratio, thus hampering quantitative accuracy and precision of image features. This can be obviated by a bias-free postprocessing denoising algorithm to improve precision while preserving feature accuracy. Highly constrained backprojection (HYPR) is a denoising algorithm that offers substantial denoising while preserving resolution using a 3-D composite image—usually a weighted sum over all dynamic frames. However, HYPR still introduces bias in frames where the feature contrast differs from that in the composite, and HYPR denoising is limited by the composite noise level. In this work, we extend the HYPR operator to be iterative and 4-D to minimize the potential mismatching contrast between the composite and frames. The initial composite is generated using regional averages instead of temporal sums to improve the level of denoising. Through phantom, simulation, and human studies, we demonstrate that this iterative 4-D HYPR (IHYPR4D) operator yields improved accuracy and precision compared to the traditional 3-D HYPR.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical SciencesSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207