MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414603395 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2025.3615075

Low-Count PET Image Reconstruction With Generalized Sparsity Priors via Unrolled Deep Networks

2025· article· en· W4414603395 on OpenAlexafffund
Minghan Fu, Bo Liao, Zhanli Hu, Fang‐Xiang Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHyperparameterPrior probabilityDeep learningIterative reconstructionPattern recognition (psychology)Regularization (linguistics)Expectation–maximization algorithmThresholdingMedical imagingIterative method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in reconstructing low-count PET (Positron EmissionTomography) images, attracting considerable attention in the medical imaging community. However, most existing deep learning approaches have not fully exploited the unique physical characteristics of PET imaging in the design of fidelity and prior regularization terms, resulting in constrained model performance and interpretability. In light of these considerations, we introduce an unrolled deep network based on maximum likelihood estimation for the Poisson distribution and a Generalized domain transformation for Sparsity learning, dubbed GS-Net. To address this complex optimization challenge, we employ the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) framework, integrating a modified Expectation Maximization (EM) approach to address the primary objective and utilize the shrinkage thresholding approach to optimize the L1 norm term. Additionally, within this unrolled deep network, all hyperparameters are adaptively adjusted through end-to-end learning to eliminate the need for manual parameter tuning. Through extensive experiments on simulated patient brain datasets and real patient whole-body clinical datasets with multiple count levels, our method has demonstrated advanced performance compared to traditional non-iterative and iterative reconstruction, deep learning-based direct reconstruction, and hybrid unrolled methods, as demonstrated by qualitative and quantitative evaluations.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207