MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205228245 · doi:10.32920/16814956.v1

Optical Flow-Based Image Registration In Flair MRI

2021· preprint· en· W4205228245 on OpenAlexaff
Sergiu Mocanu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityPublic Health OntarioDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceImage registrationComputer scienceComputer visionConvolutional neural networkOptical flowOrientation (vector space)Similarity (geometry)Image warpingPattern recognition (psychology)Fluid-attenuated inversion recoveryMutual informationImage (mathematics)MathematicsMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical imaging is one of the most common areas of computer vision research and algorithm development. FLAIR-MRI is particularly useful in highlighting damaged and necrotic tissue in brain images due to high contrast and resolution. Image registration is a method of warping images to the same geometric space to quantify tissue changes with accuracy. With advances in deep-learning via convolutional neural networks, complex problems can now move closer to some semblance of a solution with purpose-built and domain specific models. To overcome the non-learnable nature of current registration algorithms, ideas are adapted from video processing solutions of calculating optical flow between temporally spaced frames using unsupervised CNN-based methods to warp moving medical images to a fixed image space. The proposed total network loss combines pixelwise photometric differences, flow smoothness, and intensity correlation. Registration accuracy of the proposed and four other registration algorithms is measured by examining tissue integrity, pixelwise alignment, orientation, and global intensity similarity. The results, tested on two large FLAIRMRI datasets consisting of 700 and 4000 brain volumes, show that the optical-flow registration technique is able to obtain maximal alignment while maintaining structural tissue integrity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207