Characterization of DTI Indices in the Cervical, Thoracic, and Lumbar Spinal Cord in Healthy Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to characterize in vivo measurements of diffusion along the length of the entire healthy spinal cord and to compare DTI indices, including fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD), between cord regions. The objective is to determine whether or not there are significant differences in DTI indices along the cord that must be considered for future applications of characterizing the effects of injury or disease. A cardiac gated, single-shot EPI sequence was used to acquire diffusion-weighted images of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions of the spinal cord in nine neurologically intact subjects (19 to 22 years). For each cord section, FA versus MD values were plotted, and a k-means clustering method was applied to partition the data according to tissue properties. FA and MD values from both white matter (average FA = 0.69, average MD = 0.93 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and grey matter (average FA = 0.44, average MD = 1.8 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) were relatively consistent along the length of the cord.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".