Cellular Exchange Imaging (CEXI): Evaluation of a diffusion model including water exchange in cells using numerical phantoms of permeable spheres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Biophysical models of diffusion MRI have been developed to characterize microstructure in various tissues, but existing models are not suitable for tissue composed of permeable spherical cells. In this study we introduce Cellular Exchange Imaging (CEXI), a model tailored for permeable spherical cells, and compares its performance to a related Ball & Sphere (BS) model that neglects permeability. Methods We generated DW‐MRI signals using Monte‐Carlo simulations with a PGSE sequence in numerical substrates made of spherical cells and their extracellular space for a range of membrane permeability. From these signals, the properties of the substrates were inferred using both BS and CEXI models. Results CEXI outperformed the impermeable model by providing more stable estimates cell size and intracellular volume fraction that were diffusion time‐independent. Notably, CEXI accurately estimated the exchange time for low to moderate permeability levels previously reported in other studies (). However, in highly permeable substrates (), the estimated parameters were less stable, particularly the diffusion coefficients. Conclusion This study highlights the importance of modeling the exchange time to accurately quantify microstructure properties in permeable cellular substrates. Future studies should evaluate CEXI in clinical applications such as lymph nodes, investigate exchange time as a potential biomarker of tumor severity, and develop more appropriate tissue models that account for anisotropic diffusion and highly permeable membranes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".