Magnetic resonance imaging–based radiation treatment plans for dogs may be feasible with the use of generative adversarial networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this research was to examine the feasibility of utilizing generative adversarial networks (GANs) to generate accurate pseudo-CT images for dogs. Methods: This study used head standard CT images and T1-weighted transverse with contrast 3-D fast spoiled gradient echo head MRI images from 45 nonbrachycephalic dogs that received treatment between 2014 and 2023. Two conditional GANs (CGANs), one with a U-Net generator and a PatchGAN discriminator and another with a residual neural network (ResNet) U-Net generator and ResNet discriminator were used to generate the pseudo-CT images. Results: The CGAN with a ResNet U-Net generator and ResNet discriminator had an average mean absolute error of 109.5 ± 153.7 HU, average peak signal-to-noise ratio of 21.2 ± 4.31 dB, normalized mutual information of 0.89 ± 0.05, and dice similarity coefficient of 0.91 ± 0.12. The dice similarity coefficient for the bone was 0.71 ± 0.17. Qualitative results indicated that the most common ranking was "slightly similar" for both models. The CGAN with a ResNet U-Net generator and ResNet discriminator produced more accurate pseudo-CT images than the CGAN with a U-Net generator and PatchGAN discriminator. Conclusions: The study concludes that CGAN can generate relatively accurate pseudo-CT images but suggests exploring alternative GAN extensions. Clinical Relevance: Implementing generative learning into veterinary radiation therapy planning demonstrates the potential to reduce imaging costs and time.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".