MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Benchmarking 3D Multi-Coil NC-PDNet MRI Reconstruction

2025· preprint· en· W4404168045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asma Tanabene, Chaithya Giliyar Radhakrishna, Aurélien Massire, Mariappan S. Nadar, Philippe Ciuciu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUndersamplingComputer scienceCartesian coordinate systemBenchmarkingCompressed sensingBenchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligenceIterative reconstructionInferenceElectromagnetic coilArtificial neural networkSampling (signal processing)Channel (broadcasting)Pattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmComputer visionMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has shown great promise for MRI reconstruction from undersampled data, yet there is a lack of research on validating its performance in 3D parallel imaging acquisitions with non-Cartesian undersampling. In addition, the artifacts and the resulting image quality depend on the under-sampling pattern. To address this uncharted territory, we extend the Non-Cartesian Primal-Dual Network (NC-PDNet), a state-of-the-art unrolled neural network, to a 3D multi-coil setting. We evaluated the impact of channel-specific versus channel-agnostic training configurations and examined the effect of coil compression. Finally, we benchmark four distinct non-Cartesian undersampling patterns, with an acceleration factor of six, using the publicly available Calgary-Campinas dataset. Our results show that NC-PDNet trained on compressed data with varying input channel numbers achieves an average PSNR of 42.98dB for 1 mm isotropic 32 channel whole-brain 3D reconstruction. With an inference time of 4.95sec and a GPU memory usage of 5.49 GB, our approach demonstrates significant potential for clinical research application.

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→