MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393386948 · doi:10.3390/tomography10040038

Test–Retest Reproducibility of Reduced-Field-of-View Density-Weighted CRT MRSI at 3T

2024· article· en· W4393386948 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTomography · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesIndiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteWellcome TrustWellcome
KeywordsReproducibilityNuclear medicineVoxelMathematicsNuclear magnetic resonanceComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligencePhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantifying an imaging modality's ability to reproduce results is important for establishing its utility. In magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), new acquisition protocols are regularly introduced which improve upon their precursors with respect to signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), total acquisition duration, and nominal voxel resolution. This study has quantified the within-subject and between-subject reproducibility of one such new protocol (reduced-field-of-view density-weighted concentric ring trajectory (rFOV-DW-CRT) MRSI) by calculating the coefficient of variance of data acquired from a test-retest experiment. The posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) and the right superior corona radiata (SCR) were selected as the regions of interest (ROIs) for grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM), respectively. CVs for between-subject and within-subject were consistently around or below 15% for Glx, tCho, and Myo-Ins, and below 5% for tNAA and tCr.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.312 · 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