MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4287751635 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.14738

Cascaded Convolutional Neural Networks with Perceptual Loss for Low Dose\n CT Denoising

2020· preprint· en· W4287751635 on OpenAlexaff
Sepehr Ataei, Javad Alirezaie, Paul Babyn

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSaskatoon Medical ImagingToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkContrast (vision)Artificial intelligenceNoise reductionComputer scienceGround truthMean squared errorImage (mathematics)PerceptionImage denoisingDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Reduction (mathematics)Radiation doseArtificial neural networkResidual neural networkContrast enhancementMathematicsNuclear medicineMedicineRadiologyStatisticsMagnetic resonance imagingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low Dose CT Denoising research aims to reduce the risks of radiation exposure\nto patients. Recently researchers have used deep learning to denoise low dose\nCT images with promising results. However, approaches that use\nmean-squared-error (MSE) tend to over smooth the image resulting in loss of\nfine structural details in low contrast regions of the image. These regions are\noften crucial for diagnosis and must be preserved in order for Low dose CT to\nbe used effectively in practice. In this work we use a cascade of two neural\nnetworks, the first of which aims to reconstruct normal dose CT from low dose\nCT by minimizing perceptual loss, and the second which predicts the difference\nbetween the ground truth and prediction from the perceptual loss network. We\nshow that our method outperforms related works and more effectively\nreconstructs fine structural details in low contrast regions of the image.\n

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.144 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→