2021
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28812
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic determination of the regularization weighting for wavelet‐based compressed sensing MRI reconstructions

Abstract: Purpose To present a method that automatically, rapidly, and in a noniterative manner determines the regularization weighting for wavelet‐based compressed sensing reconstructions. This method determines level‐specific regularization weighting factors from the wavelet transform of the image obtained from zero‐filling in k‐space. Methods We compare reconstruction results obtained by our method, λauto, to the ones obtained by the L‐curve, λLcurve, and the minimum NMSE, λNMSE. The comparisons are done using in viv… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The generic CS MR inverse problem can be given as: where x is the complex image, y is k-space data that are undersampled, and R is a regularization parameter. The sensing matrix A is composed as: where P denotes a sampling operator, F denotes a discrete Fourier transform operator, and S denotes coil sensitivity information [ 24 ]. The first term in the right-hand side of Equation (1) ensures data fidelity, and the second term promotes sparsity in a certain domain (e.g., DWT domain).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The generic CS MR inverse problem can be given as: where x is the complex image, y is k-space data that are undersampled, and R is a regularization parameter. The sensing matrix A is composed as: where P denotes a sampling operator, F denotes a discrete Fourier transform operator, and S denotes coil sensitivity information [ 24 ]. The first term in the right-hand side of Equation (1) ensures data fidelity, and the second term promotes sparsity in a certain domain (e.g., DWT domain).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For comparative tuning-free methods, we ran FISTA with a per-subband threshold tuned automatically with SURE using a white alising model, referred to as "SURE-IT" 18 . We also evaluated a recently proposed parameter-free variant of FISTA, which automatically selects a per-scale sparse weighting based on k-means clustering of the zero-filled estimate, referred to in this work as "Automatic-FISTA" (A-FISTA) 19 .…”
Section: Comparative Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For A-FISTA, we found that such a stopping criterion typically stopped the algorithm prematurely, so to give A-FISTA the best chance of a high-quality reconstruction we used a fixed, large number of iterations. As in the original A-FISTA paper 19 , we chose 200 iterations.…”
Section: Comparative Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[10], where the optimal parameter is chosen empirically by tracing a trade-off curve (the L-curve), or the generalized cross-validation (GCV), a well-performing method that requires high-dimensional matrix calculus, cf. [31,53,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%