Corrigendum to “Explicitly encoding the cyclic nature of breathing signal allows for accurate breathing motion prediction in radiotherapy with minimal training data” [Phys. Imaging Radiat. Oncol. 30 (2024) 100594]
Andreas Renner, Ingo Gulyas, Martin Buschmann, Gerd Heilemann, Barbara Knäusl, Martin Heilmann, Joachim Widder, Dietmar Georg, Petra Trnková
Abstract
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques · Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications · Atomic and Subatomic Physics Research
The authors of this article would like to provide further clarification of a sentence that appeared in section 2.2 of the published version.
In Material and Methods, in Section 2.2*. Data pre-processing,* we described the model which explicitly encodes the cyclic nature of the breathing signal (denoted as Model 2 – and the conventional model for comparison as Model 1). The description of Model 2 was directly followed by describing the process of dynamic scaling without explicitly mentioning that the dynamic scaling was only used for Model 2. This needs to be clarified by adding “Model 2” to the first sentence of the 4th paragraph of Section 2.2.
The correct version of the sentence should read: “Dynamic scaling was used for pre-processing of training data of Model 2 to enhance the influence of each breathing pattern segment, which was transformed by the scaling step into the range [−1,1].”
The authors apologise for this oversight.