MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2756683516 · doi:10.1101/195859

Evaluation of MRI sequences for quantitative T1 brain mapping

2017· preprint· en· W2756683516 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Panagiotis Tsialios, Michael J. Thrippleton, Cyril Pernet

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsReproducibilityImaging phantomNuclear medicineComputer scienceScannerPattern recognition (psychology)Image qualityNuclear magnetic resonanceBiomedical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMedicineChemistryPhysicsChromatographyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract T1 mapping constitutes a quantitative MRI technique finding significant application in brain imaging. It allows improved evaluation of contrast uptake, blood perfusion, volume, and provides more specific biomarkers of disease progression compared to conventional T1-weighted images. While there are many techniques for T1-mapping, there is also a wide range of reported T1-values in tissues, raising the issue of protocols’ reproducibility and standardization. The gold standard for obtaining T1-maps is based on acquiring IR-SE sequence. Widely used alternative sequences are IR-SE-EPI, VFA (DESPOT), DESPOT-HIFI and MP2RAGE that speed up scanning and fitting procedures. A custom MRI phantom was used to assess the reproducibility and accuracy of the different methods. All scans were performed using a 3T Siemens Prisma scanner. The acquired data were processed using two different codes. The main difference was observed for VFA (DESPOT) which grossly overestimated T1 relaxation time by 214 ms [CI: 126 270 ms] compared to the IR-SE sequence. MP2RAGE and DESPOT-HIFI sequences gave slightly shorter T1 than IR-SE (∼20 to 30ms) and can be considered as alternative and time-efficient methods for acquiring accurate T1 maps of the human brain, while IR-SE-EPI gave identical results, at a cost of a lower image quality.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→