MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409281524 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/adf487

Time-resolved dynamic CBCT reconstruction using prior-model-free spatiotemporal Gaussian representation (PMF-STGR)

2025· article· en· W4409281524 on OpenAlexaff
Jiacheng Xie, Hua‐Chieh Shao, You Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionProjection (relational algebra)Imaging phantomGaussianIterative reconstructionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Time-resolved CBCT imaging, which reconstructs a dynamic sequence of CBCTs reflecting intra-scan motion (one CBCT per x-ray projection without phase sorting/binning), is highly desired for regular/irregular motion characterization, patient setup, and motion-adapted radiotherapy. Representing patient anatomy and associated motion fields as 3D Gaussians, we developed a Gaussian representation-based framework (PMF-STGR) for fast and accurate dynamic CBCT reconstruction. Approach: PMF-STGR comprises three major components: a dense set of 3D Gaussians to reconstruct a reference-frame CBCT for the dynamic sequence; another 3D Gaussian set to capture three-level, coarse-to-fine motion-basis-components (MBCs) to model the intra-scan motion; and a CNN-based motion encoder to solve projection-specific temporal coefficients for the MBCs. Scaled by the temporal coefficients, the learned MBCs will combine into deformation vector fields (DVFs) to deform the reference CBCT into projection-specific, time-resolved CBCTs to capture the dynamic motion. Due to the strong representation power of 3D Gaussians, PMF-STGR can reconstruct dynamic CBCTs in a 'one-shot' training fashion from a standard 3D CBCT scan, without using any prior anatomical/motion model. Main results: We evaluated PMF-STGR using XCAT phantom simulations and real patient full/half-fan scans. Metrics, including the image relative error (RE), structural-similarity-index-measure (SSIM), tumor center-of-mass-error (COME), and landmark localization error (LE), were used to evaluate the accuracy of solved dynamic CBCTs and motion. PMF-STGR shows clear advantages over a state-of-the-art, implicit neural representation (INR)-based approach, PMF-STINR. Compared with PMF-STINR, PMF-STGR reduces reconstruction time by ~50% while reconstructing less blurred images with comparable/better motion accuracy. For XCAT, the mean(±s.d.) RE, SSIM, and COME were 0.128(0.009), 0.990(0.002), and 0.71mm(0.40mm) for PMF-STGR, compared with 0.149(0.016), 0.944(0.006), and 0.94mm(0.18mm) for PMF-STINR. For patients, the mean(±s.d.) landmark LE was 1.40mm(0.34mm) for PMF-STGR, and 1.54mm(0.35mm) for PMF-STINR. Significance: With improved efficiency/accuracy, PMF-STGR enhances the applicability of dynamic CBCT imaging for potential clinical translation.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207