Improving microvascular brain analysis with adversarial learning for OCT–TPM vascular domain translation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling microscopic cerebrovascular networks is essential for understanding cerebral blood flow and oxygen transport. High-resolution imaging modalities, such as Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) and Two-Photon Microscopy (TPM), are widely used to capture microvascular structure and topology. Although TPM angiography generally provides better localization and image quality than OCT, its use is impractical in studies involving fluorescent dye leakage. Here, we exploit generative adversarial learning to produce high-quality TPM angiographies from OCT vascular stacks. We investigate the use of 2D and 3D cycle generative adversarial networks (CycleGANs) trained on unpaired image samples. We evaluate the generated TPM vascular structures based on image similarity and signal-to-noise ratio. Additionally, we evaluated the generated vascular structures after applying vessel segmentation and extracting their 3D topological models. Our results demonstrate that the 2D adversarial learning model outperforms the 3D model in terms of image quality. However, our statistical comparisons of vascular network features show the 3D model's consistent superiority in generating vascular structures. Our work provides a complementary approach to enhance vascular analysis when only OCT imaging is available.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".