MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047702931 · doi:10.1002/mrm.22893

Computationally rapid method of estimating signal‐to‐noise ratio for phased array image reconstructions

2011· article· en· W2047702931 on OpenAlexafffund
Curtis N. Wiens, Shawn J. Kisch, Jacob Willig-Onwuachi, Charles A. McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGrinnell College
KeywordsComputer scienceNoise (video)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Monte Carlo methodAlgorithmIterative reconstructionComputationReplicaPixelArtificial intelligenceComputer visionImage (mathematics)MathematicsStatisticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for parallel MRI reconstructions is difficult due to spatially dependent noise amplification. Existing approaches for measuring parallel MRI SNR are limited because they are not applicable to all reconstructions, require significant computation time, or rely on repeated image acquisitions. A new SNR estimation approach is proposed, a hybrid of the repeated image acquisitions method detailed in the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) standard and the Monte Carlo based pseudo-multiple replica method, in which the difference between images reconstructed from the unaltered acquired data and that same data reconstructed after the addition of calibrated pseudo-noise is used to estimate the noise in the parallel MRI image reconstruction. This new noise estimation method can be used to rapidly compute the pixel-wise SNR of the image generated from any parallel MRI reconstruction of a single acquisition. SNR maps calculated with the new method are validated against existing SNR calculation techniques.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0040.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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