Recycling diagnostic MRI for empowering brain morphometric research – Critical & practical assessment on learning-based image super-resolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preliminary studies have shown the feasibility of deep learning (DL)-based super-resolution (SR) technique for reconstructing thick-slice/gap diagnostic MR images into high-resolution isotropic data, which would be of great significance for brain research field if the vast amount of diagnostic MRI data could be successively put into brain morphometric study. However, less evidence has addressed the practicability of the strategy, because lack of a large-sample available real data for constructing DL model. In this work, we employed a large cohort (n = 2052) of peculiar data with both low through-plane resolution diagnostic and high-resolution isotropic brain MR images from identical subjects. By leveraging a series of SR approaches, including a proposed novel DL algorithm of Structure Constrained Super Resolution Network (SCSRN), the diagnostic images were transformed to high-resolution isotropic data to meet the criteria of brain research in voxel-based and surface-based morphometric analyses. We comprehensively assessed image quality and the practicability of the reconstructed data in a variety of morphometric analysis scenarios. We further compared the performance of SR approaches to the ground truth high-resolution isotropic data. The results showed (i) DL-based SR algorithms generally improve the quality of diagnostic images and render morphometric analysis more accurate, especially, with the most superior performance of the novel approach of SCSRN. (ii) Accuracies vary across brain structures and methods, and (iii) performance increases were higher for voxel than for surface based approaches. This study supports that DL-based image super-resolution potentially recycle huge amount of routine diagnostic brain MRI deposited in sleeping state, and turning them into useful data for neurometric research.
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 | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".