Simulation of a synchronized methodology for MR-based electromechanical property imaging during transcranial electrical stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Recent investigations into the biomechanics of the brain have unveiled alteration in tissue stiffness triggered by external stimuli. For instance, visual stimulation effects can be measured in elasticity images of the cortex generated by functional magnetic resonance elastography (MRE). Such a mechanical characterization method combined with non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), a technique that seeks to selectively modulate particular parts of the brain using weak electrical currents, has the potential to influence research on various neurological disorders. In this in silico study, we aimed to elucidate individual and interdependent aspects related to a synchronized biomechanical imaging and non-invasive brain stimulation methodology. Magnetic resonance electrical impedance tomography (MREIT) was incorporated to the pipeline, providing a promising way of evaluating NIBS-induced electrical current patterns in the brain while leveraging MRE and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) experimental settings. Methods: A mouse head model was assembled using open-access atlases to include five anatomical structures: skin/subcutaneous tissue, skull, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), brain white and grey matters. MRE, tACS, and MREIT experiments were simulated using Comsol Multiphysics with Matlab Livelink. Synthetic MRE and MREIT data were processed using the subzone non-linear inversion and harmonic Bz algorithm, respectively, to reconstruct images of the distributed complex shear modulus and electrical conductivity. Results and Discussion: Lorentz body forces arising from simultaneous MRE and tACS elicited elastic waves of negligible amplitude compared with the extrinsic actuation levels reported in the literature, which allowed accurate reconstructions of the complex shear modulus. Qualitative electrical conductivity maps retrieved by MREIT accurately delineated anatomical regions of the brain model and could be used to recover reasonably accurate distributions of tACS-induced currents. This multi-physics approach has potential for translation to human brain imaging, and may provide more possibilities for the characterization of brain function together than in isolation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".