Rational approximation of golden angles: Accelerated reconstructions for radial MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a generic radial sampling scheme that combines the advantages of golden ratio sampling with simplicity of equidistant angular patterns. The irrational angle between consecutive spokes in golden ratio-based sampling schemes enables a flexible retrospective choice of temporal resolution, while preserving good coverage of k-space for each individual bin. Nevertheless, irrational increments prohibit precomputation of the point-spread function (PSF), can lead to numerical problems, and require more complex processing steps. To avoid these problems, a new sampling scheme based on a rational approximation of golden angles (RAGA) is developed. METHODS: The theoretical properties of RAGA sampling are mathematically derived. Sidelobe-to-peak ratios (SPR) are numerically computed and compared to the corresponding golden ratio sampling schemes. The sampling scheme is implemented in the BART toolbox and in a radial gradient-echo sequence. Feasibility is shown for quantitative imaging in a phantom and a cardiac scan of a healthy volunteer. RESULTS: RAGA sampling can accurately approximate golden ratio sampling and has almost identical PSF and SPR. In contrast to golden ratio sampling, each frame can be reconstructed with the same equidistant trajectory using different sampling masks, and the angle of each acquired spoke can be encoded as a small index, which simplifies processing of the acquired data. CONCLUSION: RAGA sampling provides the advantages of golden ratio sampling while simplifying data processing, rendering it a valuable tool for dynamic and quantitative MRI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".