Inline dual‐echo T2 quantification in brain using a fast mapping reconstruction technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T2 mapping from 2D proton density and T2-weighted images (PD-T2) using Bloch equation simulations can be time consuming and introduces a latency between image acquisition and T2 map production. A fast T2 mapping reconstruction method is investigated and compared with a previous modeling approach to reduce computation time and allow inline T2 maps on the MRI console. Brain PD-T2 images from five multiple sclerosis patients were used to compare T2 map reconstruction times between the new subtraction method and the Euclidean norm minimization technique. Bloch equation simulations were used to create the lookup table for decay curve matching in both cases. Agreement of the two techniques used Bland-Altman analysis for investigating individual subsets of data and all image points in the five volumes (meta-analysis). The subtraction method resulted in an average reduction of computation time for single slices from 134 s (minimization method) to 0.44 s. Comparing T2 values between the subtraction and minimization methods resulted in a confidence interval ranging from -0.06 to 0.06 ms (95% of values were within ± 0.06 ms between the techniques). Using identical reconstruction code based on the subtraction method, inline T2 maps were produced from PD-T2 images directly on the scanner console. The excellent agreement between the two methods permits the subtraction technique to be interchanged with the previous method, reducing computation time and allowing inline T2 map reconstruction based on Bloch simulations directly on the scanner.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".