MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416922305 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2025.3639398

OPTIKS: Optimized Gradient Properties Through Timing in <i>k</i> -Space

2025· article· en· W4416922305 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthew A. McCready, Xiaozhi Cao, Kawin Setsompop, John M. Pauly, Adam B. Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGE HealthcareNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsWaveformTime domainNoise (video)Frequency domainGradient descentTrajectoryPosition (finance)Electromagnetic coilTree traversal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A customizable method (OPTIKS) for designing fast trajectory-constrained gradient waveforms with optimized time domain properties was developed. Given a specified multidimensional $k$ -space trajectory, the method optimizes traversal speed (and therefore timing) with position along the trajectory. OPTIKS facilitates optimization of objectives dependent on the time domain gradient waveform and the arc-length domain $k$ -space speed. OPTIKS is applied to design waveforms which limit peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), minimize mechanical resonance excitation, and reduce acoustic noise. A variety of trajectory examples are presented including spirals, circular echo-planar-imaging, and rosettes. Design performance is evaluated based on duration, standardized PNS models, field measurements, gradient coil back-EMF measurements, and calibrated acoustic measurements. We show reductions in back-EMF of up to 94% and field oscillations up to 91.1%, acoustic noise decreases of up to 9.22 dB, and with efficient use of PNS models speed increases of up to 11.4%. The design method implementation is made available as an open source Python package through GitHub (https://github.com/mamccready/optiks).

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207