MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020446566 · doi:10.1118/1.1494829

Peak velocity determination using fast Fourier velocity encoding with minimal spatial encoding

2002· article· en· W2020446566 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Galea, M. Louis Lauzon, Maria Drangova

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsatile flowImaging phantomFourier transformFlow velocityEncoding (memory)Fourier analysisOpticsOrientation (vector space)Image resolutionFlow (mathematics)PhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceGeometryMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For quantitative peak velocity determination, a technique was developed that uses Fourier velocity encoding (FVE) for the fast acquisition of images of velocity with no spatial encoding other than slice selection. The technique produces images of velocity versus temporal frequency. In applications where the quantity of interest is the peak velocity and in-plane spatial localization is not required, high SNR images are produced with reduced sensitivity to errors due to slice thickness and motion. The technique was validated using steady and pulsatile flow in a straight tube, and compared to both phase contrast measurements and numerical models using steady flow in a 50% and a 75% cosinusoidal stenosis phantom. Results show that for slices as large as 2 cm and/or undergoing periodic motion, FVE can accurately measure the peak velocity in cases where a distribution of velocities exist.

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)0.004
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207