MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Active Learning Model for Adaptive PET Attenuation and Scatter Correction in Multi-Centric Studies

2021· article· en· W4295036131 on OpenAlexaff
Isaac Shiri, Amirhossein Sanaat, Esmail Jafari, Rezvan Samimi, Maziar Khateri, Peyman Sheikhzadeh, Parham Geramifar, Habibollah Dadgar, Hossein Arabi, Majid Assadi, Carlos Uribe, Arman Rahmim, Habib Zaidi

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity HospitalsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer scienceTransfer of learningPositron emission tomographyAttenuationMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Nuclear medicinePhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative PET imaging requires multiple steps including attenuation and scatter correction (ASC), commonly carried out using anatomical images (CT, MRI). Clinical centers are equipped with different scanners and use different acquisition/reconstruction protocols, and these may vary over time in a given center. As new scanners and protocols emerge, deep learning model performance may deteriorate significantly, even for models built using large datasets, hence the need to update the models. The aim of the current study was to apply a deep active learning model for adaptive PET attenuation and scatter correction in multi-centric studies. We enrolled 1110 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">18</sup> F-FDG and 950 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">68</sup> Ga-PSMA PET/CT images from 3 and 4 different centers, respectively. We implemented a deep residual network architecture with 20 blocks for different-level feature extractions. First, the deep neural network was trained on <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">18</sup> F-FDG PET images. Since the radiotracer distribution is different from <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">68</sup> Ga-PSMA PET, we used body fine tuning transfer learning to transfer ASC knowledge between radiotracers. We build deep learning-based ASC models on <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">68</sup> Ga-PSMA and then applied active learning approaches to build center-specific ASC model. We trained a 2D deep neural network for direct generation of CT-based attenuation corrected PET images from non-attenuation-scatter corrected (NAC) images of <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">68</sup> Ga-PSMA patients. For model evaluation, voxel-wise mean error (ME), mean absolute error (MAE), relative error (RE%), absolute relative error (ARE%) and structural similarity index (SSIM) were calculated between ground truth CT-based attenuation/scatter corrected and predicted PET images using the deep learning algorithm.We achieved a ME of 0.22±0.05, MAE of 0.80±0.05, RE of 2.72±7.5%, ARE of 10.0±4.5% and SSIM of 0. 98±0.02 in the test set. Overall, we applied transfer learning to transfer knowledge between different PET radiotracers and built specific models for each center separately using active learning approaches.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC)Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207