Fourier-based linear systems description of free-breathing pulmonary magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fourier-decomposition of free-breathing pulmonary magnetic resonance imaging (FDMRI) was recently piloted as a way to provide rapid quantitative pulmonary maps of ventilation and perfusion without the use of exogenous contrast agents. This method exploits fast pulmonary MRI acquisition of free-breathing proton (1H) pulmonary images and non-rigid registration to compensate for changes in position and shape of the thorax associated with breathing. In this way, ventilation imaging using conventional MRI systems can be undertaken but there has been no systematic evaluation of fundamental image quality measurements based on linear systems theory. We investigated the performance of free-breathing pulmonary ventilation imaging using a Fourier-based linear system description of each operation required to generate FDMRI ventilation maps. Twelve subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or bronchiectasis underwent pulmonary function tests and MRI. Non-rigid registration was used to co-register the temporal series of pulmonary images. Pulmonary voxel intensities were aligned along a time axis and discrete Fourier transforms were performed on the periodic signal intensity pattern to generate frequency spectra. We determined the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the FDMRI ventilation maps using a conventional approach (SNRC) and using the Fourier-based description (SNRF). Mean SNR was 4.7 ± 1.3 for subjects with bronchiectasis and 3.4 ± 1.8, for COPD subjects (p>.05). SNRF was significantly different than SNRC (p<.01). SNRF was approximately 50% of SNRC suggesting that the linear system model well-estimates the current approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".