MAPL1:<i>q</i>‐space reconstruction using ‐regularized mean apparent propagator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To improve the quality of mean apparent propagator (MAP) reconstruction from a limited number of q-space samples. METHODS: -regularised MAP (MAPL1) to consider higher order basis functions and to improve the fit without increasing the number of q-space samples. We compare MAPL1 with the least-squares optimization subject to non-negativity (MAP), and the Laplacian-regularized MAP (MAPL). We use simulations of crossing fibers and compute the normalized mean squared error (NMSE) and the Pearson's correlation coefficient to evaluate the reconstruction quality in q-space. We also compare coefficient-based diffusion indices in the simulations and in in vivo data. RESULTS: Results indicate that MAPL1 improves NMSE in 1 to 3% when compared to MAP or MAPL in a high undersampling regime. Additionally, MAPL1 produces more reproducible and accurate results for all sampling rates when there are enough basis functions to meet the sparsity criterion for the regularizer. These improved reconstructions also produce better coefficient-based diffusion indices for in vivo data. CONCLUSIONS: regularizer to MAP allows the use of more basis functions and a better fit without increasing the number of q-space samples. The impact of our research is that a complete diffusion spectrum can be reconstructed from an acquisition time very similar to a diffusion tensor imaging protocol.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".