Comparison of optimized long echo time STEAM and PRESS proton MR spectroscopy of lipid olefinic protons at 3 Tesla
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the response of lipid olefinic protons (≈ 5.35 ppm) as a function of STEAM (Stimulated Echo Acquisition Mode) mixing time (TM), and echo time (TE), to find values that resolve the olefinic resonance from water in vivo while retaining sufficient olefinic signal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PRESS (Point RESolved Spectroscopy) and STEAM experiments with varying timing parameters (TE and also TM for STEAM) were conducted on nine oils (almond, canola, cod liver, corn, linseed, peanut, sesame, sunflower, and walnut oil), and on vertebral bone marrow in vivo at 3 Tesla (T). Olefinic and methylene (methyl + methylene in vivo) peak areas were measured. RESULTS: Optimal STEAM parameters were found to be TM = 20 ms and TE = 100 ms. The STEAM olefinic/methylene area ratios (ranging between 0.1 and 0.4) calculated for each oil correlated well with ratios deduced from oil compositions in the literature (R(2) = 0.975). The optimized STEAM sequence resolved the olefinic peak from water in vivo and yielded on average 1.91 times more olefinic signal compared with a previously optimized PRESS (TE = 200 ms) sequence tailored for the same purpose. Olefinic/(methyl + methylene) area ratios obtained with optimized STEAM and PRESS in vivo were linearly correlated (R(2) = 0.972). CONCLUSION: A STEAM sequence with TE = 100 ms and TM = 20 ms provides an alternative to the previously optimized PRESS (TE = 200 ms) sequence for determining relative amounts of lipid unsaturation at 3T.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".