Accelerating parameter mapping with a locally low rank constraint
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To accelerate MR parameter mapping using a locally low rank (LLR) constraint, and the combination of parallel imaging and the LLR constraint. THEORY AND METHODS: An LLR method is developed for MR parameter mapping and compared with a globally low rank method in a multiecho spin-echo T2 mapping experiment. For acquisition with coil arrays, a combined LLR and parallel imaging method is proposed. The proposed method is evaluated in a variable flip angle T1 mapping experiment and compared with the LLR method and parallel imaging alone. RESULTS: In the multiecho spin-echo T2 mapping experiment, the LLR method is more accurate than the globally low rank method for acceleration factors 2 and 3, especially for tissues with high T2 values. Variable flip angle T1 mapping is achieved by acquiring datasets with 10 flip angles, each dataset accelerated by a factor of 6, and reconstructed by the proposed method with a small normalized root mean square error of 0.025. CONCLUSIONS: The LLR method is likely superior to the globally low rank method for MR parameter mapping. The proposed combined LLR and parallel imaging method has better performance than the two methods alone, especially with highly accelerated acquisition.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it