MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043621756 · doi:10.1002/nbm.4368

Correcting frequency and phase offsets in MRS data using robust spectral registration

2020· article· en· W3043621756 on OpenAlexaff
Mark E. Mikkelsen, Sofie Tapper, Jamie Near, Stewart H. Mostofsky, Nicolaas A.J. Puts, Richard A.E. Edden

Bibliographic record

VenueNMR in Biomedicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsResidualSubtractionComputer scienceAlgorithmFrequency domainBackground subtractionData setMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An algorithm for retrospective correction of frequency and phase offsets in MRS data is presented. The algorithm, termed robust spectral registration (rSR), contains a set of subroutines designed to robustly align individual transients in a given dataset even in cases of significant frequency and phase offsets or unstable lipid contamination and residual water signals. Data acquired by complex multiplexed editing approaches with distinct subspectral profiles are also accurately aligned. Automated removal of unstable lipid contamination and residual water signals is applied first, when needed. Frequency and phase offsets are corrected in the time domain by aligning each transient to a weighted average reference in a statistically optimal order using nonlinear least-squares optimization. The alignment of subspectra in edited datasets is performed using an approach that specifically targets subtraction artifacts in the frequency domain. Weighted averaging is then used for signal averaging to down-weight poorer-quality transients. Algorithm performance was assessed on one simulated and 67 in vivo pediatric GABA-/GSH-edited HERMES datasets and compared with the performance of a multistep correction method previously developed for aligning HERMES data. The performance of the novel approach was quantitatively assessed by comparing the estimated frequency/phase offsets against the known values for the simulated dataset or by examining the presence of subtraction artifacts in the in vivo data. Spectral quality was improved following robust alignment, especially in cases of significant spectral distortion. rSR reduced more subtraction artifacts than the multistep method in 64% of the GABA difference spectra and 75% of the GSH difference spectra. rSR overcomes the major challenges of frequency and phase correction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations89
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNMR in BiomedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207