ArticleJournal of imaging2026
Error Injection in Task-Based Image Quality Pipelines: What Regression Testing Cannot Catch, and Why Neither Internal Identities nor Closed-Form References Suffice Alone.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Task-based image quality assessment-the modulation transfer function, the noise power spectrum (NPS), the noise-equivalent quanta and model observers-fails by returning a plausible wrong number rather than an error, and the regression test most implementations carry cannot tell a plausible right answer from a plausible wrong one, because the stored reference was recorded from the defective code. We injected six defects into a validated implementation of that chain through a severity dial that recovers the correct pipeline exactly at zero. A self-consistency regression test detected none of the six. Four internal identities, which need no ground truth, and two closed-form references, which need a phantom whose answer is known, together detected all six, in every case at or before the severity at which the reported detectability index d' became wrong by more than 5%-an error that three of the six never produced. Neither family sufficed alone: the internal identities detected three of the six and the closed-form references five, and peak errors in a reported d' reached 90%. Run unmodified on measured American College of Radiology (ACR) phantom projections across seven reconstruction kernels, the three identities that can be evaluated without ground truth transferred intact-Parseval held to 4×10-16-but their tolerances did not, and the strongest apodisation drove the noise dynamic range to within 0.6% of the threshold beyond which a prewhitening observer should return no value at all rather than a computed one, because 1/NPS has ceased to be numerically meaningful.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.