Comparison of hyperpolarized <sup>3</sup>He MRI rat lung volume measurement with micro‐computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the upper-limit volume (gas plus partial tissue volume) as well as absolute volume (gas only) of lungs measured with hyperpolarized (3)He-MR imaging is compared with that determined by micro-computed tomography (CT) under similar ventilation conditions in normal rats. Five Brown Norway rats (210-259 g) were ventilated with O(2), alternately with (3)He, using a computer-controlled ventilator, and 3D density-weighted images of the lungs were acquired during a breath hold after six wash-in breaths of (3)He. The rats were then transferred to a micro-CT scanner, and a similar experimental setup was used to obtain images of the lungs during a breath hold of air with an airway pressure equal to that of the MR imaging breath hold. The upper-limit and absolute volumes obtained from (3)He-MR and micro-CT methods were not significantly different (p > 0.05). The good agreement between the lung volumes measured with the two imaging methods suggests that (3)He-MR imaging can be used for quantitative analysis of lung volume changes in longitudinal studies without the exposure to the ionizing radiation which accompanies micro-CT imaging.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".