MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2796316204 · doi:10.1101/277038

Voxel-wise T <sub>2</sub> relaxometry of Normal Pediatric Brain Development in 326 healthy infants and toddlers

2018· preprint· en· W2796316204 on OpenAlexaff
Vladimir Fonov, Ilana R. Leppert, G. Bruce Pike, D. Louis Collins

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoxelWeightingRange (aeronautics)RelaxometryArtificial intelligenceDevelopment (topology)Brain developmentPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsNuclear medicineComputer scienceMedicinePsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyNeuroscienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Quantitative T 2 data from an NIH-sponsored multi-center study of Normal Brain Development was used to perform automatic voxel-wise analysis of the changes in T2 evolution in the brain in healthy children within the age range from birth to 5 years. All data were non-linearly registered into a common coordinate space. The T 2 parameters were estimated by 2 point fitting from the PD-weighted and T2-weighted image data, or by least-squares fitting of 4 data points when addition intermediate weighting images were available. The main result of this study is voxel-level map of monoexponential evolution of T 2 in this age range indicating the delay (in months) and the rate (in 1/months) of development. The automatic maps are compared to manual region-of-interest based estimates of T 2 evolution.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→