Fiber orientation downsampling compromises the computation of white matter tract-related deformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incorporating neuroimaging-revealed structural details into finite element (FE) head models opens vast new opportunities to better understand brain injury mechanisms. Recently, growing efforts have been made to integrate fiber orientation from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) into FE models to predict white matter (WM) tract-related deformation that is biomechanically characterized by tract-related strains. Commonly used approaches often downsample the spatially enriched fiber orientation to match the FE resolution with one orientation per element (i.e., element-wise orientation implementation). However, the validity of such downsampling operation and corresponding influences on the computed tract-related strains remain elusive. To address this, the current study proposed a new approach to integrate voxel-wise fiber orientation from one DTI atlas (isotropic resolution of 1 mm3) into FE models by embedding orientations from multiple voxels within one element (i.e., voxel-wise orientation implementation). By setting the responses revealed by the newly proposed voxel-wise orientation implementation as the reference, we evaluated the reliability of two previous downsampling approaches by examining the downsampled fiber orientation and the computationally predicted tract-related strains secondary to one concussive impact. Two FE models with varying element sizes (i.e., 6.4 ± 1.6 mm and 1.3 ± 0.6 mm, respectively) were incorporated. The results showed that, for the model with a large voxel-mesh resolution mismatch, the downsampled element-wise fiber orientation, with respect to its voxel-wise counterpart, exhibited an absolute deviation over 30° across the WM/gray matter interface and the pons regions. Accordingly, this orientation deviation compromised the computation of tract-related strains with normalized root-mean-square errors up to 30% and underestimated the peak tract-related strains up to 10%. For the other FE model with finer meshes, the downsampling-induced effects were lower, both on the fiber orientation and tract-related strains. Taken together, the voxel-wise orientation implementation is recommended in future studies as it leverages the DTI-delineated fiber orientation to a larger extent than the element-wise orientation implementation. Thus, this study yields novel insights on integrating neuroimaging-revealed fiber orientation into FE models and may better inform the computation of WM tract-related deformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".