Multisite trial of MR flow measurement: Phantom and protocol design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe a portable, easily assembled phantom with well-defined bore geometry together with a series of tests that will form the basis of a standardized quality assurance protocol in a multicenter trial of flow measurement by the MR phase mapping technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The phantom consists of silicone polymer layers containing parallel straight and stenosed flow channels in one layer and a U-bend in a second layer, separated by hermetically sealed agarose slabs. The phantom is constructed by casting low melting-point metal in an aluminum mold precisely milled to the desired geometry, and then using the low melting-point metal core as a negative around which the silicone is allowed to set. By melting out the metal, the flow channels are established. The milled aluminum mold is reusable, ensuring faithful reproduction of the flow geometry for all phantoms thus produced. The agarose layers provide additional loading and static background signal for background correction. With the use of the described phantom, one can evaluate flow measurement accuracy and repeatability, as well as the influence of several imaging geometry factors: slice offset, in-plane position, and slice-flow obliquity. RESULTS: The new phantom is compact and portable, and is well suited for reassembly. We were able to demonstrate its facility in a battery of tests of interest in evaluating MR flow measurements. CONCLUSION: The phantom is a robust standardized test object for use in a multicenter trial. Such a trial, to investigate the performance of MR flow measurement using the phantom and the tests we describe, has been initiated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.050 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".