MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Limitations Of the Derived Respiratory Variation Measurements Used in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2023· article· en· W4386362775 on OpenAlexaff
Abdoljalil Addeh, Karen Ardila, Fernando Vega, Ali Golestani, M. Ethan MacDonald

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesMitacsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingRespiratory systemMagnetic resonance imagingBreathingRespirationOxygenationBlood oxygenationRespiratory monitoringRespiratory rateHuman Connectome ProjectNeuroscienceNuclear magnetic resonanceMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicineAnesthesiaPhysicsBiologyFunctional connectivityRadiologyBlood pressureAnatomyHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among different physiological sources of noise in blood oxygenation level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (BOLD-fMRI), low-frequency fluctuation in arterial carbon dioxide (CO <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</inf> ) constitutes the strongest modulator of the BOLD signal. In this paper, the performance of respiration variation (RV) and respiratory volume per time (RVT) in identifying abnormal but prominent respiratory patterns are studied. We used Human Connectome Project in the Developmental dataset, as children are a challenging cohort in fMRI studies and have irregular breathing. According to our findings, there is no guarantee that a given respiratory event evident in the abdominal respiratory belt transducer timeseries, such as a deep breath or pause in breathing, will be detectable in both RVT and RV. In addition, RVT and RV do not show similar behavior during some respiratory events, especially when the subject breathes deeply at a low rate, while they use almost similar respiratory response functions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207