Reconstruction of the orientation distribution function in single‐ and multiple‐shell q‐ball imaging within constant solid angle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
q-Ball imaging is a high-angular-resolution diffusion imaging technique that has been proven very successful in resolving multiple intravoxel fiber orientations in MR images. The standard computation of the orientation distribution function (the probability of diffusion in a given direction) from q-ball data uses linear radial projection, neglecting the change in the volume element along each direction. This results in spherical distributions that are different from the true orientation distribution functions. For instance, they are neither normalized nor as sharp as expected and generally require postprocessing, such as artificial sharpening. In this paper, a new technique is proposed that, by considering the solid angle factor, uses the mathematically correct definition of the orientation distribution function and results in a dimensionless and normalized orientation distribution function expression. Our model is flexible enough so that orientation distribution functions can be estimated either from single q-shell datasets or by exploiting the greater information available from multiple q-shell acquisitions. We show that the latter can be achieved by using a more accurate multiexponential model for the diffusion signal. The improved performance of the proposed method is demonstrated on artificial examples and high-angular-resolution diffusion imaging data acquired on a 7-T magnet.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".