MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516742234 · doi:10.1002/mrm.25280

A framework for optimization‐based design of motion encoding in magnetic resonance elastography

2014· article· en· W1516742234 on OpenAlexafffund
Guy Nir, Ramin S. Sahebjavaher, Ralph Sinkus, Septimiu E. Salcudean

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMagnetic resonance elastographyMagnetic resonance imagingComputer scienceElastographyImaging phantomDisplacement (psychology)Encoding (memory)AlgorithmArtificial intelligencePhysicsAcousticsOpticsUltrasoundRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In conventional three-dimensional magnetic resonance elastography, motion encoding gradients (MEGs) synchronized to a mechanical excitation are applied separately in each direction to encode tissue displacement generated by the corresponding waves. This requires long acquisition times that introduce errors due to patient motion and may hinder clinical deployment of magnetic resonance elastography. In this article, a framework for MEGs sequence design is proposed to reduce scanning time and increase signal-to-noise ratio. THEORY AND METHODS: The approach is based on applying MEGs in all three directions simultaneously with varying parameters, and formulation of the problem as a linear estimation of the wave properties. Multidirectional MEGs sequences are derived by setting the problem in an experimental design framework. Such designs are implemented and evaluated on simulation and phantom data. RESULTS: Estimation error of the displacement using the proposed MEGs designs is reduced up to a factor of two in comparison with a unidirectional design with a same number of acquisitions. Alternatively, for the same error, scanning time is reduced up to a factor of three using the multidirectional designs. CONCLUSION: The proposed framework generalizes acquisition of magnetic resonance elastography, and allows quantification of design performance, and optimization-based derivation of designs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207