Motion-compensated T1 mapping in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: a technical review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T1 mapping is becoming a staple magnetic resonance imaging method for diagnosing myocardial diseases such as ischemic cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, and more. Clinically, most T1 mapping sequences acquire a single slice at a single cardiac phase across a 10 to 15-heartbeat breath-hold, with one to three slices acquired in total. This leaves opportunities for improving patient comfort and information density by acquiring data across multiple cardiac phases in free-running acquisitions and across multiple respiratory phases in free-breathing acquisitions. Scanning in the presence of cardiac and respiratory motion requires more complex motion characterization and compensation. Most clinical mapping sequences use 2D single-slice acquisitions; however newer techniques allow for motion-compensated reconstructions in three dimensions and beyond. To further address confounding factors and improve measurement accuracy, T1 maps can be acquired jointly with other quantitative parameters such as T2 , T2∗ , fat fraction, and more. These multiparametric acquisitions allow for constrained reconstruction approaches that isolate contributions to T1 from other motion and relaxation mechanisms. In this review, we examine the state of the literature in motion-corrected and motion-resolved T1 mapping, with potential future directions for further technical development and clinical translation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".