arxiv: 2604.08161 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-09 · 💻 cs.LG

Recognition: unknown

Shift- and stretch-invariant non-negative matrix factorization with an application to brain tissue delineation in emission tomography data

Anders S. Olsen , Miriam L. Navarro , Claus Svarer , Jesper L. Hinrich , Morten M{\o}rup , Gitte M. Knudsen

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG

keywords non-negative matrix factorizationshift invariancestretch invarianceemission tomographybrain imagingfrequency domaintissue delineation

0 comments

The pith

A frequency-domain non-negative matrix factorization accounts for temporal shifts and stretching to better delineate brain tissue in emission tomography.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Dynamic neuroimaging data often shows diffusion-like delays and stretching that standard decomposition methods cannot handle well. This paper introduces a shift- and stretch-invariant version of non-negative matrix factorization that models these effects directly. Shifts and stretches are estimated in the frequency domain using phase changes and padding adjustments. When applied to synthetic and real brain emission tomography scans, the approach yields more detailed maps of tissue structures. A reader would care because better modeling of transport dynamics could lead to improved understanding of brain function and pathology.

Core claim

The shift- and stretch-invariant non-negative matrix factorization estimates integer and non-integer temporal shifts along with temporal stretching factors by performing operations in the frequency domain, where shifts become phase modifications and stretching is achieved through zero-padding or truncation, and this yields a more detailed characterization of brain tissue structure in emission tomography data.

What carries the argument

Shift- and stretch-invariant non-negative matrix factorization implemented via frequency-domain phase modifications for shifts and zero-padding or truncation for stretching.

If this is right

Standard NMF cannot capture the distance-dependent temporal effects in radiotracer transport data.
The frequency-domain implementation allows recovery of non-integer shifts and stretches.
Application to brain emission tomography data produces more detailed tissue delineation than conventional methods.
Synthetic data validation confirms the model's ability to account for stretching effects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

This approach could extend to other time-series data exhibiting diffusion or scaling effects, such as in fluid dynamics or signal processing.
Integration with other neuroimaging modalities might enhance overall brain mapping accuracy.
Further development could include handling multiple dimensions of stretching simultaneously.

Load-bearing premise

Frequency-domain phase modifications and zero-padding or truncation recover non-integer shifts and stretches accurately without introducing artifacts or violating non-negativity constraints in real tomography data.

What would settle it

An experiment where ground-truth stretched and shifted components are added to real tomography data, and the model fails to recover the original tissue structures accurately.

read the original abstract

Dynamic neuroimaging data, such as emission tomography measurements of radiotracer transport in blood or cerebrospinal fluid, often exhibit diffusion-like properties. These introduce distance-dependent temporal delays, scale-differences, and stretching effects that limit the effectiveness of conventional linear modeling and decomposition methods. To address this, we present the shift- and stretch-invariant non-negative matrix factorization framework. Our approach estimates both integer and non-integer temporal shifts as well as temporal stretching, all implemented in the frequency domain, where shifts correspond to phase modifications, and where stretching is handled via zero-padding or truncation. The model is implemented in PyTorch (https://github.com/anders-s-olsen/shiftstretchNMF). We demonstrate on synthetic data and brain emission tomography data that the model is able to account for stretching to provide more detailed characterization of brain tissue structure.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper adds frequency-domain shift and stretch handling to NMF for emission tomography time series, but the abstract leaves the artifact and validation questions open.

read the letter

The core contribution is a direct extension of NMF that folds integer and non-integer temporal shifts (via phase factors) and stretches (via zero-padding or truncation in the Fourier domain) into the factorization. This is implemented in PyTorch with public code, which is a practical step for anyone dealing with diffusion-induced delays and scaling in dynamic PET or similar count data. The claim is that this produces cleaner tissue structure maps on both synthetic and real brain scans by explicitly accounting for the stretching that standard NMF ignores. That target is reasonable; the effects are known in the modality and linear decompositions often smear them. What the work does cleanly is keep the non-negativity constraint while moving the invariance into the frequency representation, avoiding explicit time-domain warping at each iteration. The stress-test note about possible ringing or negativity after inverse FFT is worth checking in the full text. If the paper only shows qualitative before-and-after maps without reporting post-transform negativity rates, L2 stretch recovery error, or a time-domain interpolation baseline, then the central improvement rests on an untested assumption. Non-integer stretches via padding are equivalent to sinc resampling, and emission signals are strictly non-negative, so any introduced negatives would require clipping or projection that the abstract does not mention. The free parameters (component count plus shift/stretch estimates) are standard for NMF variants, and nothing in the description looks circular. This is the kind of targeted methods paper that neuroimaging groups might try on their own data. It is not broad enough for most readers outside that niche, but the implementation detail and the specific problem it attacks make it worth a referee's time rather than an immediate desk reject. I would bring it to a reading group only if someone is actively working on dynamic PET decomposition.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a shift- and stretch-invariant non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) framework for dynamic neuroimaging data exhibiting diffusion-like temporal delays and scale effects. Shifts are modeled via phase factors in the frequency domain and stretching via zero-padding or truncation before inverse FFT; the method is implemented in PyTorch and demonstrated on synthetic data and brain emission tomography measurements to yield more detailed brain tissue characterization.

Significance. If the frequency-domain transformations preserve non-negativity and avoid significant artifacts, the approach could improve decomposition of time-series data with non-integer temporal distortions, offering a principled extension beyond standard NMF for applications in emission tomography. The open-source PyTorch code supports reproducibility, which strengthens the contribution if quantitative validation is added.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the model 'accounts for stretching to provide more detailed characterization of brain tissue structure' on synthetic and real data is unsupported, as no quantitative metrics, baselines, reconstruction errors, or statistical comparisons are reported; this directly undermines assessment of the method's effectiveness.
[Method description (frequency-domain construction)] Frequency-domain stretching implementation: zero-padding/truncation for non-integer stretch factors is equivalent to sinc-based resampling and risks introducing Gibbs ringing or post-inverse-FFT negativity in strictly non-negative count data; without reported checks on negativity, L2 error versus ground-truth stretch, or time-domain interpolation baselines, the non-negativity constraint of NMF may be violated in practice.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract would be strengthened by including at least one key quantitative result or comparison metric to support the 'more detailed characterization' claim.
Notation for shift (τ) and stretch parameters should be explicitly defined with their estimation procedure to clarify the free parameters.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and describe the revisions we intend to make.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the model 'accounts for stretching to provide more detailed characterization of brain tissue structure' on synthetic and real data is unsupported, as no quantitative metrics, baselines, reconstruction errors, or statistical comparisons are reported; this directly undermines assessment of the method's effectiveness.

Authors: We agree that the abstract claim is currently unsupported by quantitative evidence. The demonstrations in the manuscript are qualitative, relying on visual inspection of the resulting tissue delineations. In the revised version we will add quantitative validation, including reconstruction errors on synthetic data with known ground-truth factors, comparisons against standard NMF and other baselines, and any applicable statistical measures. These additions will be reflected in both the abstract and a new results subsection. revision: yes
Referee: [Method description (frequency-domain construction)] Frequency-domain stretching implementation: zero-padding/truncation for non-integer stretch factors is equivalent to sinc-based resampling and risks introducing Gibbs ringing or post-inverse-FFT negativity in strictly non-negative count data; without reported checks on negativity, L2 error versus ground-truth stretch, or time-domain interpolation baselines, the non-negativity constraint of NMF may be violated in practice.

Authors: The referee correctly notes that zero-padding or truncation for non-integer stretches is equivalent to sinc resampling and can introduce ringing or negativity. The current manuscript does not report explicit checks for post-inverse-FFT negativity, L2 stretch errors, or comparisons to time-domain interpolation. In the revision we will add a dedicated analysis subsection that quantifies these effects on synthetic signals, reports the degree of negativity (if any) after the inverse FFT, computes L2 errors against ground-truth stretched signals, and includes a baseline comparison with time-domain linear interpolation. If negativity is observed, we will discuss mitigation within the NMF optimization. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper presents a modeling extension to standard NMF by incorporating frequency-domain phase shifts for integer/non-integer delays and zero-padding/truncation for stretching. This is framed as a direct implementation choice rather than a derivation that reduces to its own fitted parameters or self-referential definitions. No load-bearing steps equate predictions to inputs by construction, and no self-citation chains or uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work are invoked to force the central result. The framework is self-contained as an algorithmic proposal, with claims supported by demonstrations on synthetic and real data that remain independently testable.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review limits visibility into parameters and assumptions; core model rests on standard NMF non-negativity plus new invariance handling for diffusion effects.

free parameters (2)

number of NMF components
Standard hyperparameter in NMF models, likely selected or cross-validated but not detailed.
shift and stretch estimation parameters
Estimated during optimization; exact form and initialization unknown from abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Emission tomography signals admit a non-negative factorization with additive temporal shifts and multiplicative stretching.
Invoked to justify the invariant model for diffusion-like data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5469 in / 1129 out tokens · 44815 ms · 2026-05-10T16:51:46.580657+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

[1]

Partial volume effect in SPECT & PET imaging and impact on radionuclide dosimetry es- timates,

H. Marquis, K. Willowson, and D. Bailey, “Partial volume effect in SPECT & PET imaging and impact on radionuclide dosimetry es- timates,”Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology, 2023.DOI:10.22038/AOJNMB.2022.63827.1448

work page doi:10.22038/aojnmb.2022.63827.1448 2023
[2]

Automatic seg- mentation of dynamic neuroreceptor single-photon emission tomog- raphy images using fuzzy clustering,

P. D. Acton, L. S. Pilowsky, H. F. Kung, and P. J. Ell, “Automatic seg- mentation of dynamic neuroreceptor single-photon emission tomog- raphy images using fuzzy clustering,”European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 1999.DOI:10.1007/s002590050425

work page doi:10.1007/s002590050425 1999
[3]

CHAPTER 59 - A Cluster Analysis Approach for the Characteriza- tion of Dynamic PET Data,

J. Ashburner, J. Haslam, C. Taylor, V . J. Cunningham, and T. Jones, “CHAPTER 59 - A Cluster Analysis Approach for the Characteriza- tion of Dynamic PET Data,” inQuantification of Brain Function Us- ing PET, 1996.DOI:10.1016/B978-012389760-2/50061- X

work page doi:10.1016/b978-012389760-2/50061- 1996
[4]

Delineation and quantitation of brain lesions by fuzzy clustering in Positron Emission Tomography,

A.-E.-O. Boudraa, J. Champier, L. Cinotti, J.-C. Bordet, F. Lavenne, and J.-J. Mallet, “Delineation and quantitation of brain lesions by fuzzy clustering in Positron Emission Tomography,”Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics, 1996.DOI:10 . 1016 / 0895 - 6111(96)00025-0

1996
[5]

Segmentation of Dynamic Total-Body [18F]-FDG PET Images Using Unsupervised Cluster- ing,

M. K. Jaakkola, M. Rantala, A. Jalo, T. Saari, J. Hentil ¨a, J. S. Helin, T. A. Nissinen, O. Eskola, J. Rajander, K. A. Virtanen, J. C. Han- nukainen, F. L´opez-Pic´on, and R. Kl ´en, “Segmentation of Dynamic Total-Body [18F]-FDG PET Images Using Unsupervised Cluster- ing,”International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2023.DOI:10. 1155/2023/3819587

2023
[6]

Noninvasive estimation of cerebral blood flow using image-derived carotid input function in H/sub 2//sup 15/O dynamic PET,

K. M. Kim, H. Watabe, M. Shidahara, J. Y . Ahn, S. Choi, N. Kudomi, K. Hayashida, Y . Miyake, and H. Iida, “Noninvasive estimation of cerebral blood flow using image-derived carotid input function in H/sub 2//sup 15/O dynamic PET,” in2001 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (Cat. No.01CH37310), 2001.DOI: 10.1109/NSSMIC.2001.1008569

work page doi:10.1109/nssmic.2001.1008569 2001
[7]

Non-negative matrix factorization of dynamic images in nuclear medicine,

J. S. Lee, D. Lee, S. Choi, K. S. Park, and D. S. Lee, “Non-negative matrix factorization of dynamic images in nuclear medicine,” in 2001 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2001. DOI:10.1109/NSSMIC.2001.1009222

work page doi:10.1109/nssmic.2001.1009222 2001
[8]

Quantitative evaluation of unsupervised clustering algorithms for dynamic total-body PET im- age analysis,

O. Rainio, M. K. Jaakkola, and R. Kl ´en, “Quantitative evaluation of unsupervised clustering algorithms for dynamic total-body PET im- age analysis,”Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology, 2025. DOI:10.1080/03091902.2025.2466834

work page doi:10.1080/03091902.2025.2466834 2025
[9]

Shifted Non-Negative Matrix Factorization,

M. Mørup, K. H. Madsen, and L. K. Hansen, “Shifted Non-Negative Matrix Factorization,” in2007 IEEE Workshop on Machine Learn- ing for Signal Processing, 2007.DOI:10 . 1109 / MLSP . 2007 . 4414296

2007
[10]

J., SEJNOWSKI, T

A. J. Bell and T. J. Sejnowski, “An information-maximization ap- proach to blind separation and blind deconvolution.,”Neural compu- tation, 1995.DOI:10.1162/neco.1995.7.6.1129

work page doi:10.1162/neco.1995.7.6.1129 1995
[11]

Learning the parts of objects by non- negative matrix factorization,

D. D. Lee and H. S. Seung, “Learning the parts of objects by non- negative matrix factorization,”Nature, 1999.DOI:10 . 1038 / 44565

1999
[12]

Shifted factor analy- sis—Part I: Models and properties,

R. A. Harshman, S. Hong, and M. E. Lundy, “Shifted factor analy- sis—Part I: Models and properties,”Journal of Chemometrics, 2003. DOI:10.1002/cem.808

work page doi:10.1002/cem.808 2003
[13]

Time and Frequency Domain Optimization with Shift, Convolution and Smoothness in Factor Analysis Type Decompositions,

K. H. Madsen, L. K. Hansen, and M. Mørup, “Time and Frequency Domain Optimization with Shift, Convolution and Smoothness in Factor Analysis Type Decompositions,” Report, 2009

2009
[14]

Bayesian Optimization with Adaptive Surrogate Models for Automated Experimental De- sign

R. Gu, Y . Rakita, L. Lan, Z. Thatcher, G. E. Kamm, D. O’Nolan, B. Mcbride, A. Wustrow, J. R. Neilson, K. W. Chapman, Q. Du, and S. J. L. Billinge, “Stretched non-negative matrix factorization,”npj Computational Materials, 2024.DOI:10.1038/s41524- 024- 01377-5

work page doi:10.1038/s41524- 2024
[15]

Time-frequency scaling property of Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT),

S. A. Talwalkar and S. L. Marple, “Time-frequency scaling property of Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT),” in2010 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2010.DOI: 10.1109/ICASSP.2010.5495902

work page doi:10.1109/icassp.2010.5495902 2010
[16]

Shift-invariant multilinear decomposition of neuroimag- ing data,

M. Mørup, L. K. Hansen, S. M. Arnfred, L.-H. Lim, and K. H. Madsen, “Shift-invariant multilinear decomposition of neuroimag- ing data,”NeuroImage, 2008.DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage. 2008.05.062

work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage 2008
[17]

A. S. Olsen, A. Brammer, P. M. Fisher, and M. Moerup,Uncovering dynamic human brain phase coherence networks, 2024.DOI:10 . 1101/2024.11.15.623830

2024
[18]

Coupled Generator Decomposition for Fusion of Electro- and Magnetoencephalogra- phy Data,

A. S. Olsen, J. D. Nielsen, and M. Mørup, “Coupled Generator Decomposition for Fusion of Electro- and Magnetoencephalogra- phy Data,” in2024 32nd European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), 2024.DOI:10 . 23919 / EUSIPCO63174 . 2024 . 10715032

2024
[19]

Circadian variation in human cerebrospinal fluid production measured by magnetic resonance imaging,

C. Nilsson, F. St ˚ahlberg, C. Thomsen, O. Henriksen, M. Herning, and C. Owman, “Circadian variation in human cerebrospinal fluid production measured by magnetic resonance imaging,”The Amer- ican Journal of Physiology, 1992.DOI:10 . 1152 / ajpregu . 1992.262.1.R20

1992
[20]

K-Shape: Efficient and Accurate Clustering of Time Series,

J. Paparrizos and L. Gravano, “K-Shape: Efficient and Accurate Clustering of Time Series,”SIGMOD Rec., 2016.DOI:10.1145/ 2949741.2949758

work page arXiv 2016