MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410632554 · doi:10.22215/etd/2025-16494

Separating the vascular and nonvascular sources of magnetic susceptibility in physiological MRI techniques based on the reversible transverse relaxation rate, R2’

2025· dissertation· en· W4410632554 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear magnetic resonanceRelaxation (psychology)Magnetic resonance imagingTransverse planeMagnetic relaxationMedicineRadiologyCondensed matter physicsPhysicsInternal medicineMagnetic fieldMagnetizationQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signal is the most common functional MRI technique for mapping human brain organization. It is a qualitative measure that reflects changes in oxygen metabolism and blood flow driven by changes in brain activity. Various techniques exist to quantify physiological parameters underlying the BOLD signal, primarily based on relating them to the transverse relaxation rates. Quantitative susceptibility maps measured in subjects at rest and during a hypercapnic challenge were used to determine how much vasculature contributes to magnetic susceptibility compared to other tissues. Iso-oxygen saturation maps show the apparent oxygen saturation of blood where the susceptibility of blood and surrounding non-blood tissue would be equivalent, it is closer to 0.9. Non-blood susceptibility creates bias in quantifying oxygen metabolism in gas-free calibrated BOLD and quantitative BOLD. Iso-oxygen saturation of blood was found to be lower in deeper cortical tissue and to negatively correlate with non-heme iron concentration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→