Brian Toner, Ute Goerke, Eze Ahanonu, Kevin Johnson, Vibhas Deshpande, Holden H Wu, Maria I Altbach, Ali Bilgin
{"title":"Methods for Uncertainty Quantification in Dictionary Matching to Advance Reliability of Quantitative MRI.","authors":"Brian Toner, Ute Goerke, Eze Ahanonu, Kevin Johnson, Vibhas Deshpande, Holden H Wu, Maria I Altbach, Ali Bilgin","doi":"10.1002/mrm.70459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Purpose: Dictionary matching is a standard tool in quantitative MRI (qMRI), but typically lacks uncertainty quantification (UQ). This is critical when advanced reconstructions (e.g., compressed sensing, deep learning) introduce complex-valued, spatially varying, and temporally correlated noise that violates standard assumptions of independent and identically distributed (iid) noise.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two voxel-wise uncertainty methods: a frequentist Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT) and a Bayesian marginal posterior approach, are introduced. Noise is modeled as spatially varying and temporally correlated using the covariance estimated from background regions. Methods were validated via simulations and phantom experiments using radial turbo spin-echo ( <math> <mrow> <msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow> <mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> mapping) and radial Look-Locker ( <math> <mrow> <msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow> <mrow><mn>1</mn></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> mapping). In vivo experiments characterized uncertainty under varying acceleration factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Simulations confirmed both methods achieve nominal coverage rates (e.g., 95% intervals containing the true value 95% of the time) where standard iid assumptions fail. Phantom results showed excellent agreement with gold-standard spin-echo references. In vivo experiments highlighted that higher acceleration factors widen uncertainty intervals for <math> <mrow> <msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow> <mrow><mn>1</mn></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> and <math> <mrow> <msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow> <mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> . The LRT method proved more computationally efficient than the Bayesian approach while providing comparable interval estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A robust framework is presented for UQ in dictionary-matched qMRI. By modeling the non-iid noise inherent in modern reconstructions, these methods provide statistically interpretable UQ that assesses the reliability of parameter maps in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":18065,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1956-1971"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13419121/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.70459","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: Purpose: Dictionary matching is a standard tool in quantitative MRI (qMRI), but typically lacks uncertainty quantification (UQ). This is critical when advanced reconstructions (e.g., compressed sensing, deep learning) introduce complex-valued, spatially varying, and temporally correlated noise that violates standard assumptions of independent and identically distributed (iid) noise.
Methods: Two voxel-wise uncertainty methods: a frequentist Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT) and a Bayesian marginal posterior approach, are introduced. Noise is modeled as spatially varying and temporally correlated using the covariance estimated from background regions. Methods were validated via simulations and phantom experiments using radial turbo spin-echo ( mapping) and radial Look-Locker ( mapping). In vivo experiments characterized uncertainty under varying acceleration factors.
Results: Simulations confirmed both methods achieve nominal coverage rates (e.g., 95% intervals containing the true value 95% of the time) where standard iid assumptions fail. Phantom results showed excellent agreement with gold-standard spin-echo references. In vivo experiments highlighted that higher acceleration factors widen uncertainty intervals for and . The LRT method proved more computationally efficient than the Bayesian approach while providing comparable interval estimates.
Conclusion: A robust framework is presented for UQ in dictionary-matched qMRI. By modeling the non-iid noise inherent in modern reconstructions, these methods provide statistically interpretable UQ that assesses the reliability of parameter maps in clinical settings.
目的:字典匹配是定量MRI (qMRI)的标准工具,但通常缺乏不确定度量化(UQ)。当高级重建(例如压缩感知、深度学习)引入复杂值、空间变化和时间相关的噪声时,这一点至关重要,这些噪声违反了独立和同分布(iid)噪声的标准假设。方法:介绍了两种体素不确定性方法:频率似然比检验(LRT)和贝叶斯边际后验方法。噪声建模为空间变化和时间相关,使用从背景区域估计的协方差。通过径向涡轮自旋回波(t2 $$ {T}_2 $$映射)和径向Look-Locker (t1 $$ {T}_1 $$映射)的模拟和模拟实验验证了方法。体内实验在不同的加速度因素下具有不确定性。结果:模拟证实两种方法都达到了名义覆盖率(例如,95%)% intervals containing the true value 95% of the time) where standard iid assumptions fail. Phantom results showed excellent agreement with gold-standard spin-echo references. In vivo experiments highlighted that higher acceleration factors widen uncertainty intervals for T 1 $$ {T}_1 $$ and T 2 $$ {T}_2 $$ . The LRT method proved more computationally efficient than the Bayesian approach while providing comparable interval estimates.Conclusion: A robust framework is presented for UQ in dictionary-matched qMRI. By modeling the non-iid noise inherent in modern reconstructions, these methods provide statistically interpretable UQ that assesses the reliability of parameter maps in clinical settings.
期刊介绍:
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (Magn Reson Med) is an international journal devoted to the publication of original investigations concerned with all aspects of the development and use of nuclear magnetic resonance and electron paramagnetic resonance techniques for medical applications. Reports of original investigations in the areas of mathematics, computing, engineering, physics, biophysics, chemistry, biochemistry, and physiology directly relevant to magnetic resonance will be accepted, as well as methodology-oriented clinical studies.