Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article is based on an introductory lecture given for the past many years during the “MR Physics and Techniques for Clinicians” course at the Annual Meeting of the ISMRM. This introduction is not intended to be a comprehensive overview of the field, as the subject of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) physics is large and complex. Rather, it is intended to lay a conceptual foundation by which magnetic resonance image formation can be understood from an intuitive perspective. The presentation is nonmathematical, relying on simple models that take the reader progressively from the basic spin physics of nuclei, through descriptions of how the magnetic resonance signal is generated and detected in an MRI scanner, the foundations of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxation, and a discussion of the Fourier transform and its relation to MR image formation. The article continues with a discussion of how magnetic field gradients are used to facilitate spatial encoding and concludes with a development of basic pulse sequences and the factors defining image contrast. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2012;. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
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".