MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Improving robustness of 3D multi-shot EPI by structured low-rank reconstruction of segmented CAIPI sampling for fMRI at 7T

2022· article· en· W4312157416 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xi Chen, Wenchuan Wu, Mark Chiew

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal Academy of EngineeringCanada Research ChairsWellcome Trust
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceSingle shotSampling (signal processing)One shotEncoding (memory)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional (3D) encoding methods are increasingly being explored as alternatives to two-dimensional (2D) multi-slice acquisitions in fMRI, particularly in cases where high isotropic resolution is needed. 3D multi-shot EPI acquisition, as the workhorse of 3D fMRI imaging, is susceptible to physiological fluctuations which can induce inter-shot phase variations, and thus reducing the achievable tSNR, negating some of the benefit of 3D encoding. This issue can be particularly problematic at ultra-high fields like 7T, which have more severe off-resonance effects. In this work, we aim to improve the temporal stability of 3D multi-shot EPI at 7T by improving its robustness to inter-shot phase variations. We presented a 3D segmented CAIPI sampling trajectory ("seg-CAIPI") and an improved reconstruction method based on Hankel structured low-rank matrix recovery. Simulation and in-vivo results demonstrate that the combination of the seg-CAIPI sampling scheme and the proposed structured low-rank reconstruction is a promising way to effectively reduce the unwanted temporal variance induced by inter-shot physiological fluctuations, and thus improve the robustness of 3D multi-shot EPI for fMRI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→