MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406891760 · doi:10.1109/tce.2025.3535668

An Advanced Denoising Technique for Low-Dose CBCT Imaging: Enhancing Image Quality and Consumer Safety in Dental Diagnostics

2025· article· en· W4406891760 on OpenAlexafffund
Simin Mirzaei, Hamid Reza Tohidypour, Panos Nasiopoulos, Siddharth R. Vora, Shahriar Mirabbasi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImage qualityNoise reductionMedical imagingQuality (philosophy)Medical physicsBiomedical engineeringComputer visionComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) plays a crucial role in dentistry, providing detailed imaging for diagnosis and treatment planning. However, standard CBCT imaging involves high radiation levels, raising safety concerns and driving the adoption of low-dose imaging, which often compromises image quality. This paper presents a novel denoising pipeline specifically designed to address the complex noise characteristics of low-dose CBCT images, which we have identified as resembling speckle noise. Our approach integrates advanced filtering techniques, innovative noise estimation methods, and brightness correction for 3D image reconstruction, while also leveraging the human visual system’s sensitivity to different frequencies to enhance CBCT visual quality. Experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art denoising techniques, including deep learning-based approaches, in achieving superior visual quality. This innovation not only enhances diagnostic precision but also improves patient safety, setting a new benchmark for image quality in dental care.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Consumer ElectronicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207