Jason P. Stockmann 1, Gigi Galiana 2, Leo Tam 1, and R. Todd Constable 1,2 Yale University, Department of Biomedical Engineering 1, Department of Diagnostic.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Boyce/DiPrima 9th ed, Ch 2.4: Differences Between Linear and Nonlinear Equations Elementary Differential Equations and Boundary Value Problems, 9th edition,
Advertisements

Image Registration  Mapping of Evolution. Registration Goals Assume the correspondences are known Find such f() and g() such that the images are best.
Shapelets Correlated with Surface Normals Produce Surfaces Peter Kovesi School of Computer Science & Software Engineering The University of Western Australia.
Alignment Visual Recognition “Straighten your paths” Isaiah.
Component Analysis (Review)
Principal Component Analysis Based on L1-Norm Maximization Nojun Kwak IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2008.
November 12, 2013Computer Vision Lecture 12: Texture 1Signature Another popular method of representing shape is called the signature. In order to compute.
Evaluation of Reconstruction Techniques
Figure 2. Signal level (left) degrades with slice offset and slice thickness when Z2 SEM is used in GradLoc imaging (ROI = FOV/2). To recover the full.
Topics spatial encoding - part 2. Slice Selection  z y x 0 imaging plane    z gradient.
Principles of MRI: Image Formation
Implementation of PROPELLER MRI method for Diffusion Tensor Reconstruction A. Cheryauka 1, J. Lee 1, A. Samsonov 2, M. Defrise 3, and G. Gullberg 4 1 –
More MR Fingerprinting
EARS1160 – Numerical Methods notes by G. Houseman
Real-Time MRI – Outline Biomed NMR JF11/59 Technical Considerations - Data Acquisition - Image Reconstruction Preliminary Applications - Joint Movements,
Alternatives to Spherical Microphone arrays: Hybrid Geometries Aastha Gupta & Prof. Thushara Abhayapala Applied Signal Processing CECS To be presented.
Master thesis by H.C Achterberg
x – independent variable (input)
Project Overview Reconstruction in Diffracted Ultrasound Tomography Tali Meiri & Tali Saul Supervised by: Dr. Michael Zibulevsky Dr. Haim Azhari Alexander.
Function Optimization Newton’s Method. Conjugate Gradients
Markus Strohmeier Sparse MRI: The Application of
Signal Analysis and Processing for SmartPET D. Scraggs, A. Boston, H Boston, R Cooper, A Mather, G Turk University of Liverpool C. Hall, I. Lazarus Daresbury.
EMLAB 1 Power Flow and PML Placement in FDTD. EMLAB 2 Lecture Outline Review Total Power by Integrating the Poynting Vector Total Power by Plane Wave.
Applications in GIS (Kriging Interpolation)
Lecture II-2: Probability Review
lecture 2, linear imaging systems Linear Imaging Systems Example: The Pinhole camera Outline  General goals, definitions  Linear Imaging Systems.
MRI Image Formation Karla Miller FMRIB Physics Group.
Principles of MRI Physics and Engineering
Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research The University of Colorado STATISTICAL ORBIT DETERMINATION Project Report Unscented kalman Filter Information.
ElectroScience Lab IGARSS 2011 Vancouver Jul 26th, 2011 Chun-Sik Chae and Joel T. Johnson ElectroScience Laboratory Department of Electrical and Computer.
Parallel Imaging Reconstruction
1 Hybrid methods for solving large-scale parameter estimation problems Carlos A. Quintero 1 Miguel Argáez 1 Hector Klie 2 Leticia Velázquez 1 Mary Wheeler.
Jason P. Stockmann 1 and R. Todd Constable 1,2 Yale University, Department of Biomedical Engineering 1, Department of Diagnostic Radiology 2, New Haven,
Model of the theoretical gravity Normal gravity Elevation effect The effect of material beneath the station - the plate effect Topographic or terrain effect.
Partial Parallel imaging (PPI) in MR for faster imaging IMA Compressed Sensing June, 2007 Acknowledgement: NIH Grants 5RO1CA and 5P41RR008079, Pierre-Francois.
EE369C Final Project: Accelerated Flip Angle Sequences Jan 9, 2012 Jason Su.
Image, one quantity of interest is the variance: (4) which is defined as the RMS difference between the recovered susceptibilities and their actual values.
RSL/MRSL Journal Club VIPR/Radial MRI Kitty Moran.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft EPIK for TRIMAGE Seong Dae Yun 1 and N. Jon Shah 1,2 1 Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4 Forschungszentrum Jülich.
Environmental and Exploration Geophysics I tom.h.wilson Department of Geology and Geography West Virginia University Morgantown, WV.
 (Worse) It is a fact that engineers select an appropriate variable and the transformed observations are treated as though they are normally distributed.
Allen W. Song, PhD Brain Imaging and Analysis Center Duke University MRI: Image Formation.
Luke Bloy1, Ragini Verma2 The Section of Biomedical Image Analysis
A CCELERATED V ARIABLE F LIP A NGLE T 1 M APPING VIA V IEW S HARING OF P SEUDO -R ANDOM S AMPLED H IGHER O RDER K-S PACE J.Su 1, M.Saranathan 1, and B.K.Rutt.
Image Reconstruction using Dynamic EPI Phase Correction Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies using echo planar imaging (EPI) employ data acquisition.
Figure 3. Log-log plot of simulated oscillating phantom, assuming a Gaussian-shaped field. Field constants a 1 =a 2 =0.1. The data initially plateau, then.
PID CONTROLLERS By Harshal Inamdar.
GPU Accelerated MRI Reconstruction Professor Kevin Skadron Computer Science, School of Engineering and Applied Science University of Virginia, Charlottesville,
Quantum Two 1. 2 Angular Momentum and Rotations 3.
Introduction In positron emission tomography (PET), each line of response (LOR) has a different sensitivity due to the scanner's geometry and detector.
An Assessment of O-Space Imaging Robustness to Local Field Inhomogeneities Jason P. Stockmann and R. Todd Constable #549Session – Parallel Imaging: Stretching.
1 Methods in Image Analysis – Lecture 3 Fourier CMU Robotics Institute U. Pitt Bioengineering 2630 Spring Term, 2004 George Stetten, M.D., Ph.D.
Declaration of Relevant Financial Interests or Relationships David Atkinson: I have no relevant financial interest or relationship to disclose with regard.
Magnetic Resonance Learning Objectives
J OURNAL C LUB : “General Formulation for Quantitative G-factor Calculation in GRAPPA Reconstructions” Breuer, Griswold, et al. Research Center Magnetic.
Receive Coil Arrays and Parallel Imaging for fMRI of the Human Brain
Nicole Seiberlich Workshop on Novel Reconstruction Strategies in NMR and MRI 2010 Göttingen, Germany 10 September 2010 Non-Cartesian Parallel Imaging based.
A CCELERATED V ARIABLE F LIP A NGLE T 1 M APPING VIA V IEW S HARING OF P SEUDO -R ANDOM S AMPLED H IGHER O RDER K-S PACE J.Su 1, M.Saranathan 1, and B.K.Rutt.
Mathematics to Innovate Blade Profile P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Also a Fluid Device, Which abridged the Globe into Global.
FMRI data acquisition.
Stencil-based Discrete Gradient Transform Using
Monday Case of the Day Physics
T. Chernyakova, A. Aberdam, E. Bar-Ilan, Y. C. Eldar
Spectral Methods Tutorial 6 1 © Maks Ovsjanikov
An Optimal Design Method for MRI Teardrop Gradient Waveforms
Parallel Imaging Artifacts in Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Sunday Case of the Day Physics (Case 1: MR)
MRI Pulse Sequences: IR, EPI, PC, 2D and 3D
Chapter 4 . Trajectory planning and Inverse kinematics
Presentation transcript:

Jason P. Stockmann 1, Gigi Galiana 2, Leo Tam 1, and R. Todd Constable 1,2 Yale University, Department of Biomedical Engineering 1, Department of Diagnostic Radiology 2, New Haven, Conn., USA RECONSTRUCTION FROM ARBITRARY PROJECTIONS O-Space parallel imaging combines the Z2 spherical harmonic with linear gradients to perform efficient parallel imaging [1], [2]. Because the Z2 field varies as r 2 = x 2 +y 2 in the axial plane, it provides spatial encoding that is complementary to that obtained from a circumferential surface coil array. The search for optimal encoding strategies invites the exploration of a wide variety of trajectories [Poster #2868], including weighted combinations of X, Y, and Z2 fields which produce projections with different center placements (CPs). At present it is unclear how to best search this large space of potential encoding functions. A metric is needed for evaluating the performance of arbitrary sets of surface coils, gradient shapes, and trajectories. This work attempts to frame the problem of assessing imaging performance using an O- Space equivalent to the conventional g-factor. NOISE AMPLIFICATION vs. RESOLUTION Spatially-varying noise amplification in SENSE [4] and GRAPPA [5] are described by the geometry factor, or g-factor. Maps of the g-factor show the level of noise amplification throughout the image while assuming that resolution remains invariant. A direct extension of Cartesian SENSE into the domain of non-linear encoding gradients has been proposed in the form PatLoc imaging [6]. PatLoc uses pairs of orthogonal, multipolar gradients, one for readout and the other for phase encoding. Because the shapes of the applied gradients do not change between readouts, the Jacobian of the linear-to-multipolar transformation can be used to calculate voxel size throughout the FOV. The PatLoc g-factor is thus simply the SENSE g-factor weighted by the Jacobian. By contrast, in O-Space imaging, the spatially- varying resolution is a complicated function of the CPs selected for each projection. It is therefore difficult to separate out the effects of local resolution and noise amplification on the resulting image quality. NONLINEAR GRADIENTS PRODUCE SPATIALLY-VARYING POINT SPREAD FUNCTIONS The spatial derivative of nonlinear encoding fields is non- constant over the FOV. This implies that each voxel has a different point spread function. The PSF also depends on the acceleration factor. To describe the voxel-wise effect of nonlinear encoding fields, the notion of “local k-space” was recently introduced [3], [Oral #547]. The local k-space describes the k-space trajectory traversed by the net gradient field experienced in each voxel. REFERENCES 1.Stockmann JP et al. MRM 2010, in press. 2.Stockmann JP et al. ISMRM 2009, p Gallichan D et al. 3 rd Int. Workshop on Parallel MRI, Oct Pruessmann KP et al. MRM 1999;42: Breuer FA et al. MRM 2009;62: Hennig J et al. MAGMA 2008;21: Herman GT. Comput. Biol. Med. 1976;6: SIMULATIONS The condition number of the encoding matrix is the ultimate metric of encoding performance, providing information both about noise amplification and resolution. However, the encoding matrix is typically too large (~2 16 ×2 14 ) for the condition number to be obtained via singular value decomposition. TOWARDS A GEOMETRY FACTOR FOR PROJECTION IMAGING WITH NONLINEAR GRADIENT FIELDS Off-center Quadratic Encoding Function + + B0 offset = + Encode with first and second-order spherical harmonics Correspondence: This poster is available at: 8-Coil Array DISCUSSION The Monte Carlo g-factor actually decreases with acceleration, becoming less than unity for R > 1. Clearly, it is an unsuitable metric of assessing performance in this form. The reason for this anomaly is that the "fully-encoded" reconstructed passes more noise to the image by virtue of its superior resolution. By contrast, the R=16 reconstruction shows considerably less noise in the FOV center where the effective voxel size is large. Since signal is proportional to voxel area, the g-factor maps should be divided by the voxel size at each point. With their ring-like features extending far from the source voxel, O-Space PSF’s do not lend themselves to a simple definition of resolution. The PSF can be obtained by simply encoding and reconstructing from a delta-source image, but this may be too computationally-demanding to perform for multiple rival encoding functions. A computationally tractable method is therefore being sought to estimate the effects of coil and gradient encoding on each voxel’s resolution and noise amplification in O-Space imaging. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are grateful to Hemant Tagare for his insight into iterative methods for solving large matrix equations. (a.) Typical center placement (CP) scheme for R=2. Evenly- spaced subsets of these centers are used for R=4, R=8, and R=16 O-Space encoding. Point spread function estimates are plotted for a representative point with R=4 (b.), R=8, (c.), and R=16 (d.-e.). (effect of coil profiles is omitted) g-factor maps were calculated using Monte Carlo simulations based on an 8-channel coil array with a 128×128 numerical phantom consisting of ones everywhere within a circular mask. Reconstructions with acceleration factors of R = {1,2,4,8,16} were simulated, corresponding to 128, 64, 32, 16, and 8 readout echoes, respectively. R = 16, g mean = 1.24 R = 2, g mean = 0.83 Monte Carlo g-factors without compensating for sqrt(R) Monte Carlo g-factors R = 8, g mean = 0.46 R = 16, g mean = 0.31 R = 2, g mean = 1.17 R = 4, g mean = 0.65 R = 8, g mean = 1.3 R = 4, g mean = 0.65 Noise with standard deviation equal to 0.15 was added. Thirty Monte Carlo replicates were reconstructed and the voxel-wise mean and standard deviation were computed for the "fully-sampled" and undersampled reconstructions. FOV O-Space encoding reduces to a radial k-space trajectory in the central voxel where the Z2 field has no effect. At the periphery, the Z2 gradient concentrates k-space coverage in some regions of k-space while leaving gaps elsewhere. Via the Fourier Transform, local k-space coverage can be used to estimate the point spread function and resolution of a selected gradient field at a particular voxel. Question: How can the effect of coil profiles be incorporated into local k-space trajectories? We examine O-Space noise amplification using Monte Carlo simulation. Local k-space trajectories Monte Carlo g-factor maps