The CIECAM02 color‐appearance model enjoys popularity in scientific research and industrial applications since it was recommended by the CIE in 2002. However, it has been found that computational failures can occur in certain cases such as during the image processing of cross‐media color reproduction applications. Some proposals have been developed to repair the CIECAM02 model. However, all the proposals developed have the same structure as the original CIECAM02 model and solve the problems concerned at the expense of losing accuracy of predicted visual data compared with the original model. In this article, the structure of the CIECAM02 model is changed and the color and luminance adaptations to the illuminant are completed in the same space rather than in two different spaces, as in the original CIECAM02 model. It has been found that the new model (named CAM16) not only overcomes the previous problems, but also the performance in predicting the visual results is as good as if not better than that of the original CIECAM02 model. Furthermore the new CAM16 model is simpler than the original CIECAM02 model. In addition, if considering only chromatic adaptation, a new transformation, CAT16, is proposed to replace the previous CAT02 transformation. Finally, the new CAM16‐UCS uniform color space is proposed to replace the previous CAM02‐UCS space. A new complete solution for color‐appearance prediction and color‐difference evaluation can now be offered.

The new algorithm compared favorably with the old in its ability to estimate bulk motion in a limited study of volunteer motion. A larger study of patients is planned for future work.

No abstract

Purpose B0 eddy currents are a subtle but important source of artifacts in spiral MRI. This study illustrates the importance of addressing these artifacts and presents a system response‐based eddy current correction strategy using B0 eddy current phase measurements on a phantom. Methods B0 and linear eddy current system response measurements were estimated from phantom‐based measurement and used to predict residual eddy current effects in spiral acquisitions. The measurements were evaluated across multiple systems and gradient sets. The corresponding eddy current corrections were studied in both axial spiral‐in/out TSE and sagittal spiral‐out MPRAGE volunteer data. Results Correction of B0 eddy currents using the proposed method mitigated blurriness in the axial spiral‐in/out images and artifacts in the sagittal spiral‐out images. The system response measurement was found to yield repeatable results over time with some variation in the B0 eddy current responses measured between different systems. Conclusions The proposed eddy current correction framework was effective in mitigating the effects of residual B0 and linear eddy currents. Any spiral acquisition should take residual eddy currents into account. This is particularly important in spiral‐in/out acquisitions.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:A challenge with the T1-weighted postcontrast Cartesian spin-echo and turbo spin-echo brain MR imaging is the presence of flow artifacts. Our aim was to develop a rapid 2D spiral spin-echo sequence for T1-weighted MR imaging with minimal flow artifacts and to compare it with a conventional Cartesian 2D turbo spin-echo sequence.