MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100809985 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2002.803106

Understanding phase maps in MRI: a new cutline phase unwrapping method

2002· article· en· W2100809985 on OpenAlexaff
Sofia Chavez, Qing‐San Xiang, Li An

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUndersamplingPhase unwrappingPhase (matter)Computer scienceNoise (video)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionImage (mathematics)AlgorithmSynthetic aperture radarInterferometryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes phase maps. A review of the phase unwrapping problem is given. Different structures, in particular fringelines, cutlines, and poles, contained within a phase map are described and their origin and behavior investigated. The problem of phase unwrapping can then be addressed with a better understanding of the source of poles or inconsistencies. This understanding, along with some assumptions about what is being encoded in the phase of a magnetic resonance image, are used to derive a new method for phase unwrapping which relies only on the phase map. The method detects cutlines and distinguishes between noise-induced poles and signal undersampling poles based on the length of the fringelines. The method was shown to be robust to noise and successful in unwrapping challenging clinical cases.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
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

Citations160
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207