MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2008969420 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6091684

Polynomial regularization for robust MRI-based estimation of blood flow velocities and pressure gradients

2011· article· en· W2008969420 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Delles, Fabian Rengier, Sebastian Ley, Hendrik von Tengg‐Kobligk, Hans‐Ulrich Kauczor, Rüdiger Dillmann, Roland Unterhinninghofen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)PolynomialImaging phantomAlgorithmComputationA priori and a posterioriBlood flowComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligencePhysicsOpticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cardiovascular diagnostics, phase-contrast MRI is a valuable technique for measuring blood flow velocities and computing blood pressure values. Unfortunately, both velocity and pressure data typically suffer from the strong image noise of velocity-encoded MRI. In the past, separate approaches of regularization with physical a-priori knowledge and data representation with continuous functions have been proposed to overcome these drawbacks. In this article, we investigate polynomial regularization as an exemplary specification of combining these two techniques. We perform time-resolved three-dimensional velocity measurements and pressure gradient computations on MRI acquisitions of steady flow in a physical phantom. Results based on the higher quality temporal mean data are used as a reference. Thereby, we investigate the performance of our approach of polynomial regularization, which reduces the root mean squared errors to the reference data by 45% for velocities and 60% for pressure gradients.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→