MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098627671 · doi:10.3389/fnana.2020.599701

In vivo Population Averaged Stereotaxic T2w MRI Brain Template for the Adult Yucatan Micropig

2020· article· en· W3098627671 on OpenAlexaff
Stephano J. Chang, Andrea J. Santamaría, Francisco J. Sánchez, Luz M. Villamil, Pedro Pinheiro Saraiva, Jose Rodriguez, Yohjans Nunez-Gomez, Ioan Opriş, Juan P. Solano, James D. Guest, Brian R. Noga

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroanatomy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNeurosurgery Research and Education FoundationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsTemplateNeuroimagingBrain morphometryPopulationComputer scienceProbabilistic logicDiffusion MRINeurosciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceMagnetic resonance imagingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Population averaged brain templates are an essential tool for imaging-based neuroscience research, providing investigators with information about the expected size and morphology of brain structures and the spatial relationships between them, within a demographic cross-section. This allows for a standardized comparison of neuroimaging data between subjects and provides neuroimaging software with a probabilistic framework upon which further processing and analysis can be based. Many different templates have been created to represent specific study populations and made publicly available for human and animal research. An increasingly studied animal model in the neurosciences that still lacks appropriate brain templates is the adult Yucatan micropig. In particular, T2-weighted templates are absent in this species as a whole. To address this need and provide a tool for neuroscientists wishing to pursue neuroimaging research in the adult micropig, we present the construction of population averaged (n=16) T2-weighted MRI brain template for the adult Yucatan micropig. Additionally, we present initial analysis of T1-weighted (n=3), and diffusion-weighted (n=3) images through multimodal registration of these contrasts to our T2 template. The strategies used here may also be generalized to create similar templates for other study populations or species in need of template construction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroanatomySame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207