MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008221065 · doi:10.1002/mrm.10250

Orientational diffusion reflects fiber structure within a voxel

2002· article· en· W2008221065 on OpenAlexafffund
Elisabeth von dem Hagen, R. Mark Henkelman

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDiffusionVoxelDiffusion MRIFiberOrientation (vector space)Effective diffusion coefficientFiber bundleNuclear magnetic resonanceMaterials scienceGeometryPhysicsMathematicsMagnetic resonance imagingComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several new MR techniques have been introduced to infer direction through diffusion in multiple nerve fiber bundles within a voxel. To date, however, there has been no physical model reported to evaluate these methodologies and their ability to determine fiber orientation. In this article a model of diffusion analogous to nerve fibers is presented. Diffusion measurements at multiple closely spaced angles of 15 degrees in samples with different fiber orientations are compared with theoretical calculations for restricted diffusion in cylindrical geometry. Orientational diffusion measurements are shown to reflect fiber geometry and theoretical predictions to within 10%. Simulations of fiber crossings within a voxel suggest fiber orientation does not correspond to the direction of the largest measured diffusion coefficient, but theoretical knowledge of signal decay curves can predict the shape of these diffusion coefficient contours for given fiber orientation probabilities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations87
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207