Perfusion information extracted from resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely known that blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) contrast in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is an indirect measure for neuronal activations through neurovascular coupling. The BOLD signal is also influenced by many non-neuronal physiological fluctuations. In previous resting state (RS) fMRI studies, we have identified a moving systemic low frequency oscillation (sLFO) in BOLD signal and were able to track its passage through the brain. We hypothesized that this seemingly intrinsic signal moves with the blood, and therefore, its dynamic patterns represent cerebral blood flow. In this study, we tested this hypothesis by performing Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast (DSC) MRI scans (i.e. bolus tracking) following the RS scans on eight healthy subjects. The dynamic patterns of sLFO derived from RS data were compared with the bolus flow visually and quantitatively. We found that the flow of sLFO derived from RS fMRI does to a large extent represent the blood flow measured with DSC. The small differences, we hypothesize, are largely due to the difference between the methods in their sensitivity to different vessel types. We conclude that the flow of sLFO in RS visualized by our time delay method represents the blood flow in the capillaries and veins in the brain.
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 | 0.015 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".