Comprehensive assessment of nonuniform image quality: Application to imaging near metal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Comprehensive assessment of image quality requires accounting for spatial variations in (i) intensity artifact, (ii) geometric distortion, (iii) signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and (iv) spatial resolution, among other factors. This work presents an ensemble of methods to meet this need, from phantom design to image analysis, and applies it to the scenario of imaging near metal. METHODS: A modular phantom design employing a gyroid lattice is developed to enable the co-registered volumetric quantitation of image quality near a metallic hip implant. A method for measuring spatial resolution by means of local point spread function (PSF) estimation is presented and the relative fitness of gyroid and cubic lattices is examined. Intensity artifact, geometric distortion, and SNR maps are also computed. Results are demonstrated with 2D-FSE and MAVRIC-SL scan protocols on a 3T MRI scanner. RESULTS: The spatial resolution method demonstrates a worst-case error of 0.17 pixels for measuring in-plane blurring up to 3 pixels (full width at half maximum). The gyroid outperforms a cubic lattice design for the local PSF estimation task. The phantom supports four configurations toggling the presence/absence of both metal and structure with good spatial correspondence for co-registered analysis of the four quality factors. The marginal scan time to evaluate one scan protocol amounts to five repetitions. The phantom design can be fabricated in 2 days at negligible material cost. CONCLUSION: The phantom and associated analysis methods can elucidate complex image quality trade-offs involving intensity artifact, geometric distortion, SNR, and spatial resolution. The ensemble of methods is suitable for benchmarking imaging performance near metal.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".