MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

CT-Less Attenuation Correction Using Multiview Ensemble Conditional Diffusion Model on High-Resolution Uncorrected PET Images

2025· article· W4417473121 on OpenAlexaff
A. St-Georges, Alain Houle, Gaël Richard, Marc Toussaint, Christian Thibaudeau, É. Auger, Étienne Croteau, Stephen C. Cunnane, Roger Lecomte, J.-B. Michaud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsQ & T ResearchCégep de SherbrookeSherbrooke O.E.M (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrection for attenuationAttenuationPositron emission tomographyScannerImage qualityDetectorSIGNAL (programming language)Diffusion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Positron emission tomography requires precise quantification to ensure reliable diagnostic outcomes and treatment monitoring. The attenuation of emitted photons in tissues before detector capture poses a significant challenge. Without appropriate correction methods, attenuation can introduce quantitative bias, making it difficult to differentiate benign from malignant conditions, and potentially leading to misdiagnosis. Traditional attenuation correction relies on co-computed tomography (CT) scans, providing anatomical information to calculate signal loss. Unfortunately, this approach exposes patients to additional radiation, is prone to misalignment between scans, and requires expensive hardware. Recent innovations in deep learning offer an alternative solution through pseudo-CT generation. Our research demonstrates that Conditional Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models (DDPMs) significantly outperform previous state-of-the-art UNet approaches. By utilizing all three orthogonal views from non-attenuation-corrected PET images, the DDPM approach combined with ensemble voting generates higher quality pseudo-CT images with reduced artifacts and improved slice-to-slice consistency. Results from a study of 159 head scans acquired on the Siemens Biograph Vision PET/CT scanner show both qualitative and quantitative improvements in pseudo-CT generation using this diffusion model approach with an average absolute error of$(0.34 \pm 0.35) \%$for a typical PET slice compared to the PET image reconstructed with the CT.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.336
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→