MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984165891 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/52/3/016

Searching for the best model: ambiguity of inverse solutions and application to fetal magnetoencephalography

2007· article· en· W1984165891 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWelichem Biotech (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAmbiguityMagnetoencephalographyPhysicsPosition (finance)Noise (video)Orientation (vector space)Inverse problemFetusInterference (communication)Computer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligencePsychologyNeuroscienceGeometryBiologyTelecommunicationsElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fetal brain signals produce weak magnetic fields at the maternal abdominal surface. In the presence of much stronger interference these weak fetal fields are often nearly indistinguishable from noise. Our initial objective was to validate these weak fetal brain fields by demonstrating that they agree with the electromagnetic model of the fetal brain. The fetal brain model is often not known and we have attempted to fit the data to not only the brain source position, orientation and magnitude, but also to the brain model position. Simulation tests of this extended model search on fetal MEG recordings using dipole fit and beamformers revealed a region of ambiguity. The region of ambiguity consists of a family of models which are not distinguishable in the presence of noise, and which exhibit large and comparable SNR when beamformers are used. Unlike the uncertainty of a dipole fit with known model plus noise, this extended ambiguity region yields nearly identical forward solutions, and is only weakly dependent on noise. The ambiguity region is located in a plane defined by the source position, orientation, and the true model centre, and will have a diameter approximately 0.67 of the modelled fetal head diameter. Existence of the ambiguity region allows us to only state that the fetal brain fields do not contradict the electromagnetic model; we can associate them with a family of models belonging to the ambiguity region, but not with any specific model. In addition to providing a level of confidence in the fetal brain signals, the ambiguity region knowledge in combination with beamformers allows detection of undistorted temporal waveforms with improved signal-to-noise ratio, even though the source position cannot be uniquely determined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.218 · 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