MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gradient-based Optimization Algorithm for Hybrid Loss Function in Low-dose CT Denoising

2022· article· en· W4295423199 on OpenAlexaff
Farzan Niknejad Mazandarani, Luella Marcos, Paul Babyn, Javad Alirezaie

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise reductionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmDeep learningScalabilityMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning techniques have emerged in de-noising low-dose computed tomography (CT) images to avoid the potential health risks of high ionizing radiation dose on patients. Although these post-processing methods display high quality denoised images, the denoising performance still has the potential to improve. The primary purpose of this work was to determine and analyze the most effective and efficient hybrid loss function in deep learning (DL)-based denoising network. Objective functions in deep learning algorithms are the main keys for optimizing the parameters of a network and can affect the quality of the denoised image significantly. Hence, this work examined the various combinations of the most common objective functions in CT denoising networks, namely L1 loss, per-pixel loss, perceptual loss, and structural dissimilarity loss. Further, a hyperparameter learning algorithm was also introduced to find the best scalable factors of the loss functions in each hybrid loss function combination. For simplic-ity, RED-CNN was used in this study to easily demonstrate the performance of the losses during the denoising process. Based on this experiment, the balance between these loss function via the gradient-based optimization algorithm could help in the generalizability prediction of designing future CT denoising networks.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207