Myelin water fraction mapping from multiple <scp>echo</scp> spin echoes and an independent <scp>B<sub>1</sub></scp><sup>+</sup> map
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Myelin water fraction (MWF) is often obtained from a multiple echo spin echo (MESE) sequence using multi‐component T2 fitting with non‐negative least squares. This process fits many unknowns including B1+ to produce a T2 spectrum for each voxel. Presented is an alternative using a rapid B1+ mapping sequence to supply B1+ for the MWF fitting procedure. Methods Effects of B1+ errors on MWF calculations were modeled for 2D and 3D MESE using Bloch and extended phase graph simulations, respectively. Variations in SNR and relative refocusing widths were tested. Human brain experiments at 3 T used 2D MESE and an independent B1+ map. MWF maps were produced with the standard approach and with the use of the independent B1+ map. Differences in B1+ and mean MWF in specific brain regions were compared. Results For 2D MESE, MWF with the standard method was strongly affected by B1+ misestimations arising from limited SNR and response asymmetry around 180°, which decreased with increasing relative refocusing width. Using an independent B1+ map increased mean MWF and decreased coefficient of variation. Notable differences in vivo in 2D MESE were in areas of high B1+ such as thalamus and splenium where mean MWF increased by 88% and 31%, respectively (P < 0.001). Simulations also demonstrated the advantages of this approach for 3D MESE when SNR is <500. Conclusion For 2D MESE, because of increased complexity of decay curves and limited SNR, supplying B1+ improves MWF results in peripheral and central brain regions where flip angles differ substantially from 180°.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".