Synthesis of diffusion-weighted MRI scalar maps from FLAIR volumes using generative adversarial networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Acquisition and pre-processing pipelines for diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) volumes are resource- and time-consuming. Generating synthetic DWI scalar maps from commonly acquired brain MRI sequences such as fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) could be useful for supplementing datasets. In this work we design and compare GAN-based image translation models for generating DWI scalar maps from FLAIR MRI for the first time. Methods We evaluate a pix2pix model, two modified CycleGANs using paired and unpaired data, and a convolutional autoencoder in synthesizing DWI fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) from whole FLAIR volumes. In total, 420 FLAIR and DWI volumes (11,957 images) from multi-center dementia and vascular disease cohorts were used for training/testing. Generated images were evaluated using two groups of metrics: (1) human perception metrics including peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity (SSIM), (2) structural metrics including a newly proposed histogram similarity (Hist-KL) metric and mean squared error (MSE). Results Pix2pix demonstrated the best performance both quantitatively and qualitatively with mean PSNR, SSIM, and MSE metrics of 23.41 dB, 0.8, 0.004, respectively for MD generation, and 24.05 dB, 0.78, 0.004, respectively for FA generation. The new histogram similarity metric demonstrated sensitivity to differences in fine details between generated and real images with mean pix2pix MD and FA Hist-KL metrics of 11.73 and 3.74, respectively. Detailed analysis of clinically relevant regions of white matter (WM) and gray matter (GM) in the pix2pix images also showed strong significant ( p < 0.001) correlations between real and synthetic FA values in both tissue types ( R = 0.714 for GM, R = 0.877 for WM). Discussion/conclusion Our results show that pix2pix’s FA and MD models had significantly better structural similarity of tissue structures and fine details than other models, including WM tracts and CSF spaces, between real and generated images. Regional analysis of synthetic volumes showed that synthetic DWI images can not only be used to supplement clinical datasets, but demonstrates potential utility in bypassing or correcting registration in data pre-processing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".