Improved contrast in multispectral phase images derived from magnetic resonance exams of multiple sclerosis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe a method to extract data from multispectral MR exams of patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). The technique produces images of "spectral phase" (SP) relative to a reference tissue. SP images allow retrospective suppression of signal in the reference tissue, while maintaining high spatial resolution. Image quality in SP images was determined from MR exams of 5 MS patients selected at random from a clinical trial underway at our institute. Exams consisting of proton density weighted (PDw), T2 weighted (T2w), T1 weighted (T1w), and gadolinium-DTPA enhanced T1w (GAD) images were acquired from each patient. The MR exams were corrected for intensity nonuniformity, then filtered with an algorithm based upon anisotropic diffusion, to reduce noise. Principal component (PC) images and SP images relative to cerebrospinal fluid (SP(CSF)), normal appearing white matter (SP(NAWM)), gray matter (SP(GM)), and temporalis muscle (SP(MUS)) were then calculated. Contrast between tissues and MS lesions in the MR and derived images was then determined by measuring the signal-difference-to-noise ratio (dSNR) between tissues. Our new SP images provided better tissue contrast than the original MR, filtered MR, and PC images. Contrast improved between CSF and NAWM (from 19.5 to 56), CSF and GM (from 15 to 36), GM and NAWM (from 8 to 14), MS lesions and CSF (from 16 to 35), and between MS lesions and NAWM (from 24 to 47). (Maximum contrast in the original MR images compared to maximum contrast in the SP images.) The additional contrast in SP images may aid the quantification and analysis of lesion activity in MR exams of MS patients.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".