Biomimetic phantom for the validation of diffusion magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A range of advanced diffusion MRI (dMRI) techniques are currently in development which characterize the orientation of white matter fibers using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). There is a need for a physical phantom with microstructural features of the brain's white matter to help validate these methods. METHODS: Hollow, co-electrospun, aligned fibers with a tuneable size distribution have been produced in bulk and with an MR visible solvent infused into the pores. The morphology and size of the phantoms was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and compared with DTI results obtained on both a clinical and preclinical scanner. RESULTS: By varying inner diameter of the phantom fibers (from SEM: 9.5 μm, 11.9 μm, 13.4 μm) the radial diffusivity and fractional anisotropy, calculated from DTI, vary between 0.38 ± 0.05 × 10(3) and 0.61 ± 0.06 × 10(3) cm s(-1) and between 0.45 ± 0.05 and 0.33 ± 0.04, respectively. CONCLUSION: We envisage that these materials will be used for the validation of novel and established methods within the field of diffusion MRI, as well as for routine quality assurance purposes and for establishing scanner performance in multicenter trials.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".