Quantitative susceptibility mapping using a superposed dipole inversion method: Application to intracranial hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate gradient-echo phase errors caused by intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) of low signal magnitude, and propose methods to reduce artifacts from phase errors in quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) of ICH. METHODS: Two QSM methods are proposed: (1) mask-inversion that masks the phase of low signal magnitude regions, and (2) ICH magnetic dipole field isolation followed by susceptibility superposition using multiple boundaries for background field removal. The reconstruction methods were tested in eight subjects with ICH using standard single-echo susceptibility-weighted imaging at 1.5 Tesla with 40 ms echo time. Different phase unwrapping algorithms were also compared. RESULTS: Significant phase errors were evident inside ICHs with low signal magnitude. The mask-inversion method recovered susceptibility of ICH in numerical simulation and minimized phase error propagation in patients with ICH. The additional superposed dipole inversion process substantially suppressed and constrained streaking artifacts in all subjects. Using the proposed superposition method, ICH susceptibilities measured from long and short echo times were similar. Laplacian based phase unwrapping substantially underestimated the ICH dipole field as compared to a path-based method. CONCLUSION: The proposed methods of mask-inversion as well as ICH isolation and superposition can substantially reduce artifacts in QSM of ICH. Magn Reson Med 76:781-791, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".