MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408658106 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-93033-1

Gauge equivariant convolutional neural networks for diffusion MRI

2025· article· en· W4408658106 on OpenAlexafffund
Uzair Hussain, Ali R. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Open Neuroscience PlatformCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDiffusion MRIConvolutional neural networkEquivariant mapComputer scienceTensor (intrinsic definition)Angular resolution (graph drawing)Artificial intelligenceFractional anisotropySIGNAL (programming language)Pattern recognition (psychology)PhysicsAlgorithmMathematicsGeometryMagnetic resonance imagingPure mathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diffusion MRI (dMRI) is an imaging technique widely used in neuroimaging research, where the signal carries directional information of underlying neuronal fibres based on the diffusivity of water molecules. One of the shortcomings of dMRI is that numerous images, sampled at gradient directions on a sphere, must be acquired to achieve a reliable angular resolution for model-fitting, which translates to longer scan times, higher costs, and barriers to clinical adoption. In this work we introduce gauge equivariant convolutional neural network (gCNN) layers for dMRI that overcome the challenges associated with the signal being acquired on a sphere with antipodal points identified. This is done by noting that the domain is equivalent to the real projective plane, [Formula: see text], which is a non-euclidean and a non-orientable manifold. This is in stark contrast to a rectangular grid which typical convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are designed for. We apply our method to upsample angular resolution for predicting diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters from just six diffusion gradient directions. The symmetries introduced allow gCNNs the ability to train with fewer subjects as compared to a baseline model that involves only 3D convolutions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→