MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414613967 · doi:10.53555/qxw7sp51

Quantum Mechanical Simulations In Diffusion MRI

2023· article· en· W4414613967 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmed J. Allami, Hawar Sardar Hassan Al-windawi, Abdul Amir H. Kadhum

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Southampton
KeywordsBloch equationsSpin diffusionQuantumMagnetic fieldDiffusionFormalism (music)Flow (mathematics)Spin echoDiffusion equationSpin (aerodynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Various magnetic resonance imaging simulation packages rely on Bloch equations, BlochTorrey equations and the Liouville–von Neumann equation is which a dynamical formulation to simulate a voltage bias across a molecular system and to model a time-dependent current in terms of classical or quantum treatments of magnetic resonance imaging respectively. Method: The problems in these equations cannot address spin dynamic such as j-coupling and spatial dynamics such as diffusion and flow at the same level. In this study, the Fokker-Planck formalism was used to simulate phantoms that deal with diffusion and flow on the spatial dynamics side and j-coupling in the spin dynamic side using the Spinach simulation package. Result: The numerical simulation of magnetic resonance imaging has two limits in terms of research. First, a complicated spin system is associated with simple diffusion and flow, such as in spatially encoded NMR experiments. Second, a simple spin system is associated with high dimensional diffusion and flow. Conclusion: A unique simulation package that deals with the quantum mechanics treatment of spin dynamics and the classical description of diffusion and flow in three dimensions are presented in this work. Funding Statement: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.365
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.038 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences→Same topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→