u/Time_Tie348

Why Shazam and Your MRI Scanner Are Secretly Doing the Same Math | Jason Nagels
▲ 20 r/PACSAdmin+1 crossposts

Why Shazam and Your MRI Scanner Are Secretly Doing the Same Math | Jason Nagels

Been thinking about this for a while and finally recorded a short explainer on it, but wanted to share the actual substance here since I think this crowd would find it interesting even without watching.

Shazam doesn't "hear" a song. It runs the audio through a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), which breaks a messy sound waveform into its component frequencies. That's the entire trick.

MRI uses the exact same math. Raw MRI data is collected in K space, which is frequency domain data that looks like meaningless static, not an image. FFT is what converts that static into an actual spatial image you can read. No FFT, no image, full stop.

Doppler ultrasound leans on it too: frequency shifts from moving blood get run through FFT to produce velocity, direction, and flow data in real time.

The history is kind of wild too: the underlying math goes back to Joseph Fourier studying heat transfer in the early 1800s, and Gauss apparently stumbled onto a version of it around the same time. It stayed a curiosity because computing it by hand was painfully slow, until Cooley and Tukey published a fast algorithm in 1965 that made it practical, arguably the moment real-time medical imaging (and eventually, your phone identifying a song in a bar) became possible.

Curious how many other people in imaging had this "oh, that's the same thing" moment once they connected FFT in signal processing to FFT in MRI/ultrasound reconstruction. Anyone else remember when this clicked for you, or was it always obvious given your background?

youtu.be
u/Time_Tie348 — 6 days ago

Founder of open-source PACS platform ClearCanvas - on his next project, building it solo, going fully open source, and why he's now building a patient-records non-profit

https://preview.redd.it/3t3hsk7dmkhh1.png?width=468&format=png&auto=webp&s=bc03624896280eab77950552acc468177fd36438

Had a good conversation for my podcast with the guy who built ClearCanvas, an open-source medical imaging platform that's still used by clinicians around the world nearly 20 years after he started it. Thought this sub might find some of it useful.

Curious if anyone here has used ClearCanvas, or has thoughts on open source vs proprietary PACS platforms more generally?

Full conversation: https://youtu.be/ui2Ry0egd6U

u/Time_Tie348 — 15 days ago

AI Coding, DICOM Sync & the Future of PACS | Chris Hafey

New episode of Imaging Informatics Unplugged is live.

Chris Hafey — longtime medical imaging engineer — joins the show for a conversation about what happens when deep domain expertise meets AI-assisted development.

Topics covered:

• Coding with Claude after 25+ years building imaging systems
• Why small expert teams may now outbuild much larger dev teams
• The risk of skill degradation for junior and senior engineers
• Technical debt in legacy PACS
• Merkulis, Merkle trees, and the idea of “Git for healthcare data”
• A Git-like delta model for keeping PACS, VNAs, and AI pipelines in sync

Practical, technical, and refreshingly unfiltered.

For anyone working anywhere near PACS, DICOM, enterprise imaging, or healthcare data management, this episode is worth the time.

Watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0j44Y9hGg4

#ImagingInformatics #PACS #DICOM #EnterpriseImaging #HealthcareIT #RadiologyAI #Interoperability

youtube.com
u/Time_Tie348 — 2 months ago
▲ 1 r/PACSAdmin+1 crossposts

Digital Pathology Display Standards: Why Medical Monitors Change Diagnostic Accuracy | Tom Kimpe

Your digital pathology program can have a great scanner, a solid IMS, clean integration, and tons of storage.

Then still fall apart at the monitor.

That sounds extreme, but the display is the last link between the digital slide and the pathologist making the diagnosis. If that display cannot accurately reproduce the colours in the tissue, the rest of the imaging chain did not magically solve the problem.

We recently hosted a Canada Health Infoway Enterprise Imaging webinar with Tom Kimpe from Barco on digital pathology display standards, and the recording is now available.

The discussion gets into:

- Why pathology tissue can include colours that standard displays may not fully reproduce

- How variability enters the imaging chain through staining, scanners, viewers, and displays

- The difference between consumer, professional, and medical-grade displays

- ICC profiles and colour management

- What published studies show about diagnostic concordance and reading efficiency

- Why display procurement often gets treated as an afterthought in digital pathology projects

The bigger takeaway: digital pathology is not just radiology with bigger files.

It has its own workflow, standards, colour management, QA, and procurement issues. The display is one of those areas where pretending “good enough” is fine can create real problems later.

https://youtu.be/_5gnXUDtlkw

youtu.be
u/Time_Tie348 — 3 months ago

AI in Radiology: Benchmarking LLMs, Agentic Hype, and Imaging Informatics | Satvik Tripathi

Satvik is an incoming Medical Physics and Imaging Informatics PhD student at the University of Pennsylvania and works as an AI Scientist with RAD-AID International. He has been working around AI and radiology since 2019, including global health deployments and LLM benchmarking work.

The conversation focuses less on “AI is amazing” and more on where the evaluation of radiology AI still feels pretty shaky.

A few topics covered:

• Why high-accuracy numbers do not always translate into clinical usefulness

• How data leakage can inflate model performance

• Why multiple-choice benchmarks are a weak way to evaluate medical LLMs

• What happens when 20+ models are tested against an internally annotated clinical dataset

• Why fine-tuned models are not always the obvious winner

• The difference between real agentic AI and vendor-flavoured workflow automation

• Lessons from RAD-AID’s AI work in Botswana and India

• Why smaller/local open-source models may make more sense in some clinical environments

One of Satvik’s stronger points is that prompt engineering should be treated more like a scientific method than a shortcut. That feels like a more useful framing than a lot of what gets thrown around right now.

Episode link: https://youtu.be/PEp6GElgPYQ

youtu.be
u/Time_Tie348 — 3 months ago