Characterization of Portable Ultra‐Low Field <scp>MRI</scp> Scanners for Multi‐Center Structural Neuroimaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lower infrastructure requirements of portable ultra-low field MRI (ULF-MRI) systems have enabled their use in diverse settings such as intensive care units and remote medical facilities. The UNITY Project is an international neuroimaging network harnessing this technology, deploying portable ULF-MRI systems globally to expand access to MRI for studies into brain development. Given the wide range of environments where ULF-MRI systems may operate, there are external factors that might influence image quality. This work aims to introduce the quality control (QC) framework used by the UNITY Project to investigate how robust the systems are and how QC metrics compare between sites and over time. We present a QC framework using a commercially available phantom, scanned with 64 mT portable MRI systems at 17 sites across 12 countries on four continents. Using automated, open-source analysis tools, we quantify signal-to-noise, image contrast, and geometric distortions. Our results demonstrated that the image quality is robust to the varying operational environment, for example, electromagnetic noise interference and temperature. The Larmor frequency was significantly correlated to room temperature, as was image noise and contrast. Image distortions were less than 2.5 mm, with high robustness over time. Similar to studies at higher field, we found that changes in pulse sequence parameters from software updates had an impact on QC metrics. This study demonstrates that portable ULF-MRI systems can be deployed in a variety of environments for multi-center neuroimaging studies and produce robust results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".