MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400184938 · doi:10.1186/s40658-024-00660-0

Kinetic model-informed deep learning for multiplexed PET image separation

2024· article· en· W4400184938 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bailin Pan, Paul Marsden, Andrew J. Reader

Bibliographic record

VenueEJNMMI Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilKing's College LondonCentre For Medical Engineering, King’s College LondonWellcome TrustMcGill University
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPositron emission tomographyDeep learningParameterized complexityArtificial neural networkNuclear medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multiplexed positron emission tomography (mPET) imaging can measure physiological and pathological information from different tracers simultaneously in a single scan. Separation of the multiplexed PET signals within a single PET scan is challenging due to the fact that each tracer gives rise to indistinguishable 511 keV photon pairs, and thus no unique energy information for differentiating the source of each photon pair. METHODS: Recently, many applications of deep learning for mPET image separation have been concentrated on pure data-driven methods, e.g., training a neural network to separate mPET images into single-tracer dynamic/static images. These methods use over-parameterized networks with only a very weak inductive prior. In this work, we improve the inductive prior of the deep network by incorporating a general kinetic model based on spectral analysis. The model is incorporated, along with deep networks, into an unrolled image-space version of an iterative fully 4D PET reconstruction algorithm. RESULTS: C]MET PET image separation. The results demonstrate that the proposed method can achieve separation performance comparable to that obtained with single-tracer imaging. In addition, the proposed method outperformed the model-based separation methods (the conventional voxel-wise multi-tracer compartment modeling method (v-MTCM) and the image-space dual-tracer version of the fully 4D PET image reconstruction algorithm (IS-F4D)), as well as a pure data-driven separation [using a convolutional encoder-decoder (CED)], with fewer training examples. CONCLUSIONS: This work proposes a kinetic model-informed unrolled deep learning method for mPET image separation. In simulation studies, the method proved able to outperform both the conventional v-MTCM method and a pure data-driven CED with less training data.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.373
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEJNMMI PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207