Reducing clustering of readouts in non-Cartesian cine magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-Cartesian magnetic resonance imaging trajectories at golden angle increments have the advantage of allowing motion correction and gating using intermediate real-time reconstructions. However, when the acquired data are cardiac binned for cine imaging, trajectories can cluster together at certain heart rates (HR) causing image artifacts. Here, we demonstrate an approach to reduce clustering by inserting additional angular increments within the trajectory, and optimizing them while still allowing for intermediate reconstructions. Three acquisition models were simulated under constant and variable HR: golden angle (Mtrd), random additional angles (Mrnd), and optimized additional angles (Mopt). The standard deviations of trajectory angular differences (STAD) were compared through their interquartile ranges (IQR) and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (significance level: p = 0.05). Agreement between an image reconstructed with uniform sampling and images from Mtrd, Mrnd, and Mopt was analyzed using the structural similarity index measure (SSIM). Mtrd and Mopt were compared in three adults at high, low, and no HR variability. STADs from Mtrd were significantly different (p < 0.05) from Mopt and Mrnd. STAD (IQR × 10−2 rad) showed that Mopt (0.5) and Mrnd (0.5) reduced clustering relative to Mtrd (1.9) at constant HR. For variable HR, Mopt (0.5) and Mrnd (0.5) outperformed Mtrd (0.9). The SSIM (IQR) showed that Mopt (0.011) produced the best image quality, followed by Mrnd (0.014), and Mtrd (0.030). Mopt outperformed Mtrd at reduced HR variability in in-vivo studies. At high HR variability, both models performed well. This approach reduces clustering in k-space and improves image quality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".