Data-Driven Image-Based Protocol for Brain PET Image Harmonization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative FDG-PET brain imaging across multiple centers is challenged by inter-scanner variability, impacting the comparability of neuroimaging data. This study proposes a data-driven image-based harmonization protocol to address these discrepancies without relying on traditional phantom scans. The protocol uses spatially normalized FDG-PET brain images to estimate scanner-specific Gaussian smoothing filters, optimizing parameters via the structural similarity index (SSIM). Validation was performed using images from cognitively normal individuals and Alzheimer's disease patients from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. Results demonstrated robust harmonization at moderate target resolutions (8 and 10 mm FWHM), with filter estimates consistently within 1.2 mm of phantom-derived ground truths. However, at higher resolutions (6 mm FWHM), discrepancies reached up to 3 mm, reflecting reduced accuracy. These deviations were particularly evident for high-resolution scanners like HRRT, likely due to elevated noise levels and smaller sample sizes. The presented harmonization method effectively reduces inter-scanner variability in retrospective FDG-PET studies, especially valuable when phantom scans are unavailable. Nonetheless, the current limitations at finer resolutions underline the necessity for methodological refinements to meet the demands of evolving high-resolution PET imaging technologies.
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 | 0.017 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".