MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416965864 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3639971

ISMDNet: Multi-Material Decomposition Using Deep Learning and Inverse Transform Sampling in Spectral Photon Counting CT

2025· article· en· W4416965864 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Abderaouf Behouch, Nabil Maalej, Naoufel Werghi, Nesrine Kherra, Naveed Ilyas, Hacene Azizi, Younes Terchi, Aamir Raja

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKhalifa University of Science, Technology and ResearchTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsDeep learningImaging phantomPattern recognition (psychology)Sampling (signal processing)Energy (signal processing)Iterative reconstructionSingular value decompositionAttenuation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectral Photon-Counting Computed Tomography (SPCCT) is a novel imaging technique that uses photon-counting detectors to acquire images across multiple X-ray energy windows. This energy discrimination enables material decomposition (MD) using the X-ray attenuation properties of various materials. In this study, we develop a novel deep learning (DL) framework for MD in SPCCT and compare its performance with recently developed MD methods. Our approach includes three variants of an encoder-decoder network: ISMDNet (Inverse Sampling Material Decomposition Network) with dual-residual blocks, ISMDNet-AT, which incorporates a channel-wise attention mechanism, and ISMDNet-TR, which integrates multiple transformer layers. We developed a unique synthetic image generation method using inverse transform sampling to address the scarcity of spectral CT datasets and the labor-intensive nature of ground-truth annotation. Synthetic images were used to train deep learning (DL) models, which were subsequently validated and tested on real SPCCT images. We conducted two studies, one involving various known materials in a phantom and the other using a biological tissue phantom. The performance of all approaches was evaluated using the root mean square error (RMSE) and the structural similarity index measure (SSIM) for MD quality, along with precision and the F1 score to assess the effectiveness of material identification. We compared our DL models’ performance with the state-of-the-art MD methods, including direct inversion (DI), generalized dictionary learning-based image domain (GDLIMD), MARS-MD, U-Net, and InceptNet. Our MD techniques consistently outperform the other MD methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207