Learn Less, Infer More: Learning in the Fourier Domain for Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) aims to evaluate the distribution of magnetic susceptibility from magnetic resonance phase measurements by solving the ill-conditioned dipole inversion problem. Removing the artifacts and preserving the anisotropy of tissue susceptibility simultaneously is still a challenge in QSM. To deal with this issue, a novel k-QSM network is proposed to resolve dipole inversion issues in QSM reconstruction. The k-QSM network converts the results obtained by truncated k-space division (TKD) into the Fourier domain as inputs. After passing through several convolutional and residual blocks, the ill-posed signals of TKD are corrected by making the network output close to the calculation of susceptibility through multiple orientation sampling (COSMOS)-labeled QSM. To evaluate the superiority of k-QSM, comparisons with several state-of-the-art methods are performed in terms of QSM artifacts removing, anisotropy preserving, generalization ability, and clinical applications. Compared to existing methods, the k-QSM achieves a 22.31% lower normalized root mean square error, 10.30% higher peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), 33.10% lower high-frequency error norm, and 1.06% higher structural similarity. In addition, the orientation-dependent susceptibility variation obtained by k-QSM is significant, verifying that k-QSM has the ability to preserve susceptibility anisotropy. When the trained models are tested on the dataset from different centers, our k-QSM shows a strong generalization ability with the highest PSNR. Moreover, by comparing the susceptibility maps between healthy controls and drug addicts with different methods, we found the proposed k-QSM is more sensitive to the susceptibility abnormality in the patients. The proposed k-QSM method learns less-only to fix the ill-posed signals of TKD, but infers more-both COSMOS-like and anisotropy-preserving QSM results. Its generalization ability and great sensitivity to susceptibility changes can make it a potential method for distinguishing some diseases.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".