Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

This paper introduces a publicly available in vivo MRI dataset with fully sampled ground-truth images for validating 3D+t dynamic reconstruction methods.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 03:03 UTC pith:5XK7HY56

load-bearing objection Useful new 3D+t MRI dataset with reference images, but the ground-truth validity is asserted on qualitative evidence; needs quantitative validation before being used as a benchmark. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.08918 v2 pith:5XK7HY56 submitted 2026-02-09 physics.med-ph

An in vivo validation dataset for dynamic volumetric MRI

Max H.C. van Riel , David G.J. Heesterbeek , Martijn Froeling , Cornelis A.T. van den Berg , Alessandro Sbrizzi This is my paper
classification physics.med-ph PACS 87.61.-c87.57.nj
keywords dynamic MRIvolumetric MRI3D+t reconstructionk-space datasetvalidation datamuscle deformationMRI reconstructionin vivo
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper's central claim is that a new, publicly released in vivo dataset fills a critical gap in dynamic volumetric MRI research: it provides undersampled multichannel k-space data alongside fully sampled validation images, enabling quantitative validation of 3D+t reconstruction algorithms. The authors establish this by describing a pneumatic-cuff setup that induces repeatable thigh-muscle deformations in nine healthy volunteers, with four dynamic scan types and a static validation scan at nine pressure levels. They further demonstrate a binning-based reconstruction that aligns six dynamic repetitions to the validation images, showing high similarity and thereby supporting the dataset's utility. The paper aims to give the research community a benchmark resource for developing and testing time-resolved volumetric MRI methods.

Core claim

The paper's contribution is the dataset itself: a publicly available collection of multichannel undersampled k-space data from nine healthy volunteers, acquired under controlled, repeatable deformations of the thigh muscles, with fully sampled validation images for one deformation type. The key discovery is that the induced pressure-cycle deformations are consistent enough across repetitions that data from six dynamic cycles can be binned into nine motion states and reconstructed to closely match the static validation images, confirming the feasibility of using this setup for validating 3D+t reconstruction methods.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the pneumatic pressure cuff that produces repeatable, externally controlled muscle deformations, combined with a validation scan acquired at nine discrete pressure levels. The CASPR sampling pattern is used for dynamic acquisition, and a projection-based motion surrogate—derived from the center-line of k-space—enables binning the dynamic data into states matching the validation images. This binning approach is what validates the dataset's ability to provide ground-truth comparisons.

Load-bearing premise

The pressure cycle is repeatable enough across the six repetitions that the fully sampled validation images at each pressure level are representative of the actual deformations in the dynamic data.

What would settle it

If someone acquires the dataset and performs a direct comparison between the binned dynamic reconstruction and the validation images, finding significant misalignment or intensity differences in the deformation region would disprove the repeatability assumption. Additionally, if the reported correlation between projections in the 1D motion surrogate is not consistently high across all subjects, that would indicate cycle-to-cycle variation.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The dataset enables quantitative validation of 3D+t MRI reconstruction methods, filling a gap where only 2D+t datasets with ground truth were publicly available.
  • Researchers can retrospectively undersample the fully sampled validation data to test reconstruction algorithms against true ground truth.
  • The controlled deformation setup supports studies of muscle strain, stiffness, and biomechanics, as well as dynamic image reconstruction.
  • The dataset's structure (multichannel raw k-space, coil sensitivities, noise measurements) allows development of advanced reconstruction methods like parallel imaging, compressed sensing, and low-rank techniques.
  • The provided segmentation masks and anatomical reference enable motion correction and registration-based validation workflows.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The repeatability of the pressure-cuff-induced deformation is the load-bearing assumption; if deformations vary between cycles, the fully sampled validation images may not accurately represent the dynamic states, undermining the ground-truth validity.
  • The dataset could serve as a benchmark for motion-compensated reconstruction methods that aim to handle non-periodic or aperiodic motion, since the dynamic scans include variations like isometric knee flexion and cuff rotation.
  • By making both fully sampled and undersampled data available, the dataset allows for controlled studies of the trade-off between temporal resolution, spatial resolution, and reconstruction complexity.
  • The described binning approach itself—using k-space center projections for motion surrogate—could be extended to other dynamic imaging applications where periodic motion is assumed, providing a low-cost motion detection method.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This data descriptor introduces a publicly available in vivo 3D+t MRI dataset for validating dynamic volumetric reconstruction algorithms. Nine healthy volunteers underwent controlled thigh deformations induced by a pneumatic pressure cuff. For each subject the authors provide multichannel undersampled k-space data from four dynamic scans, one of which (dynamic scan 1) is a six-repetition pressure cycle with an accompanying fully sampled validation scan at nine discrete pressure levels. The dataset also includes anatomical reference images, DIXON-based muscle segmentations, coil sensitivity maps, and noise measurements, all stored in ISMRMRD format under a Zenodo DOI. To illustrate use, the authors bin the six repetitions of dynamic scan 1 against the validation projections and report that the resulting reconstructions show 'high similarity' to the corresponding fully sampled validation images.

Significance. If the dataset is as described and the fully sampled images genuinely represent the deformation states of the dynamic data, this would fill a concrete gap: public 3D+t k-space data with ground-truth validation images are scarce. The provision of raw multichannel k-space, noise data for prewhitening, coil sensitivities, a code example, and a persistent DOI are clear strengths and lower the barrier for method development and fair benchmarking. The main weakness is that the validation of the central ground-truth assumption is qualitative and indirect; this is the load-bearing issue for any data descriptor that advertises its fully sampled images as validation references.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.2.2 vs. Section 2.2.3] The ground-truth equivalence between the static validation images and the dynamic scan is asserted, not demonstrated. The validation images are acquired during 22-second holds at constant cuff pressure, whereas the dynamic scans use continuous inflation/deflation. Because soft tissue is viscoelastic, the deformation at a given nominal pressure may differ between steady-state holds and a continuously changing pressure cycle. The claim in Section 2.2.3 that 'This pressure cycle resulted in repeatable elastic deformations' needs quantitative support, e.g., per-repetition projection consistency, inter-repetition image similarity after binning, or a dedicated repeatability experiment. Without this, the fully sampled images may not be valid ground truth for the dynamic data.
  2. [Section 5] The technical validation is only qualitative ('high similarity') and relies on a 1D projection along the readout axis as the motion surrogate. This projection collapses all information in the y-z plane, so two distinct 3D deformation states can yield identical projections. The binning procedure therefore does not by itself certify that the dynamic data occupy the same deformation states as the validation images. Please report quantitative similarity metrics (e.g., SSIM, NRMSE, or mask overlap) between the binned reconstructions and the corresponding validation images, and ideally also show that the surrogate separates the nine bins in a meaningful way. This is important because the binned reconstructions are grouped using the validation projections, so some similarity is expected by construction; an independent comparison is needed.
  3. [Section 5, last sentence] The sentence 'confirming that the induced deformations during the dynamic scans were consistent with those observed in the validation scan' goes beyond what the presented evidence supports. The qualitative similarity of binned images could also be explained by the binning process itself, since bins are formed by correlation to the validation projections. A more cautious conclusion, or a dedicated analysis of deformation-field correspondence (e.g., registration of the binned images to the validation images), would be appropriate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.2.3, item 4] The text says 'The isometric knee flexion task of dynamic scan 3 was repeated with the rotated pressure cuff.' Based on the preceding items, this should likely be 'of dynamic scan 2,' since dynamic scan 3 already includes the rotated cuff without contraction. Please verify and correct.
  2. [Section 5] The statement that each bin is 'only slightly undersampled' could be made quantitative by stating the per-bin reduction factor or number of shots per bin. This would help readers assess the difficulty of the reconstruction problem.
  3. [Figure 5] The figure caption mentions 'The first principal component of the projection data is used as motion surrogate signal,' but the main text does not explain how the principal component is derived from the projections. A brief sentence would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Section 6] The advice to use rigid registration between validation and dynamic images is helpful, but the authors may also want to state whether the validation images are already in the same geometry as the dynamic scan 1 images or whether registration is always required.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the dataset availability claim is independent and the illustrative binning validation does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper is a data descriptor, not a derivation, so there is no chain of fitted parameters or equations that reduce to themselves. The only evaluative step is the Section 5 binning validation: dynamic CASPR shots are binned using the correlation between 1D readout projections from the dynamic scan and from the validation scan, and the binned reconstructions are then compared with the fully sampled validation images. This is a legitimate use of reference data: the 1D projections are used only to select/group data, not to fit the reconstructed images, and the full-volume image comparison is not guaranteed by projection matching. A 1D-projection surrogate is a limitation in validation strength, not a circular reduction. The self-citations [24,25] are mentioned only as prior demonstrations of possible strain/stiffness analyses and are not load-bearing for the dataset's central claim. The dataset's existence and format claims are independent of the illustrative reconstruction. Therefore no significant circularity is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new mathematical or physical entities. The central claim rests mainly on the domain assumption that the pressure-cuff deformation is repeatable and that the projection surrogate captures motion, both of which underlie the validation demonstration.

axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The pressure-cuff-induced deformations are repeatable and elastic across cycles.
    Stated in Section 2.2.3 and needed for the validation scan at static pressure levels to serve as ground truth for the dynamic data, and for the binning procedure in Section 5.
  • domain assumption 1D projections along the readout axis provide a sufficient surrogate for the deformation state.
    Used in Section 5 to bin CASPR shots by correlating projections; if the projection is insensitive to some deformation modes, binning could misassign data.
  • domain assumption Coil sensitivity maps from the prescan remain valid during dynamic deformation.
    Reconstruction via Eq. (1) assumes coil sensitivities; the paper notes maps were determined per scan and included in the dataset.
  • standard math Standard k-space sampling theory and Fourier reconstruction.
    Background for image reconstruction from fully sampled data; not controversial.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 8221 in / 9867 out tokens · 87318 ms · 2026-08-03T03:03:58.766296+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Dynamic volumetric MRI provides valuable information on in vivo motion and biomechanics, with applications spanning cardiac, musculoskeletal, or pulmonary imaging, amongst others. Developing reconstruction methods for time-resolved volumetric MRI is challenging due to the inherently slow acquisition process of MRI, which makes it an active area of research. However, in vivo validation of these methods remains challenging due to the lack of publicly available datasets with fully sampled ground-truth images. Here, we present a publicly available in vivo dataset designed to facilitate the development and validation of dynamic volumetric MRI reconstruction algorithms. Controlled and repeatable deformations of the muscles in the thigh were induced using a pneumatic pressure cuff, enabling the acquisition of both undersampled dynamic data and fully sampled validation images. The dataset comprises multichannel undersampled k-space data from nine healthy volunteers across four different dynamic deformations, with fully sampled validation data for one deformation. Additionally, an anatomical reference scan and muscle segmentation masks are provided for each subject. To illustrate a possible image reconstruction and validation approach, a binning-based reconstruction was performed on the undersampled data from six dynamic repetitions. The resulting images were consistent with the corresponding fully sampled validation images. This dataset offers possibilities for validating and advancing time-resolved volumetric MRI reconstruction methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.08918 by Alessandro Sbrizzi, Cornelis A.T. van den Berg, David G.J. Heesterbeek, Martijn Froeling, Max H.C. van Riel.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental setup, from left to right: pressure gauge, hand pump, long tube (allowing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Pressure profiles for the validation scans and the dynamic scans. Data acquired during the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: Regular linear sampling pattern, as used for the static validation data. Right: CASPR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the different scans in the dataset. From top to bottom: high-resolution anatomical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Binned image reconstruction approach. Projections on the readout axis are calculated for each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Model-based Dynamic 3D MRI Reconstructions using Neural Fields and Tensor Product Expansions

    eess.IV 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A model-based dynamic MRI reconstruction method using tensor products of neural fields for continuous representations outperforms prior methods at acceleration factors up to 16 while preserving motion and structure.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    & Herbst, M

    Zaitsev, M., Maclaren, J. & Herbst, M. Motion artifacts in MRI: A complex problem with many partial solutions.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging42(4), 887–901 (2015). doi:10.1002/jmri.24850

    work page doi:10.1002/jmri.24850 2015

  2. [2]

    O., Valbuena, S., Hinojar, R., Petersen, S

    Puntmann, V. O., Valbuena, S., Hinojar, R., Petersen, S. E., Greenwood, J. P., Kramer, C. M., Kwong, R. Y., McCann, G. P., Berry, C., Nagel, E. & SCMR Clinical Trial Writing Group. Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) expert consensus for CMR imaging endpoints in clinical research: part I - analytical validation and clinical qualification....

    work page doi:10.1186/s12968-018-0484-5 2018

  3. [3]

    S., De Craene, M., Langet, H., Pasquet, A., Vancraeynest, D., Pouleur, A

    Amzulescu, M. S., De Craene, M., Langet, H., Pasquet, A., Vancraeynest, D., Pouleur, A. C., Vanoverschelde, J. L. & Gerber, B. L. Myocardial strain imaging: review of general principles, validation, and sources of discrepancies.European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging20(6), 605–619 (2019). doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez041

    work page doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez041 2019

  4. [4]

    & Sinha, S

    Sinha, U., Malis, V., Csapo, R., Moghadasi, A., Kinugasa, R. & Sinha, S. Age-related differences in strain rate tensor of the medial gastrocnemius muscle during passive plantarflexion and active iso- metric contraction using velocity encoded MR imaging: Potential index of lateral force transmission. Magn. Reson. Med.73(5), 1852–1863 (2015). doi:10.1002/mrm.25312

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.25312 2015

  5. [5]

    M., Peper, E

    Mazzoli, V., Gottwald, L. M., Peper, E. S., Froeling, M., Coolen, B. F., Verdonschot, N., Sprengers, A. M., van Ooij, P., Strijkers, G. J. & Nederveen, A. J. Accelerated 4D phase contrast MRI in skeletal muscle contraction.Magn. Reson. Med.80(5), 1799–1811 (2018). doi:10.1002/mrm.27158

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.27158 2018

  6. [6]

    Ilicak, E., Ozdemir, S., Zapp, J., Schad, L. R. & Z¨ ollner, F. G. Dynamic mode decomposition of dynamic MRI for assessment of pulmonary ventilation and perfusion.Magn. Reson. Med.90(2), 761–769 (2023). doi:10.1002/mrm.29656

    doi:10.1002/mrm.29656 2023

  7. [7]

    D., Wylezinska, M., Birch, M

    Scott, A. D., Wylezinska, M., Birch, M. J. & Miquel, M. E. Speech MRI: Morphology and function. Physica Medica30(6), 604–618 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.05.001. 8

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.05.001 2014

  8. [8]

    S., Coolen, B

    de Jonge, C. S., Coolen, B. F., Peper, E. S., Motaal, A. G., Nio, C. Y., Somers, I., Strijkers, G. J., Stoker, J. & Nederveen, A. J. Evaluation of compressed sensing MRI for accelerated bowel motility imaging.Eur. Radiol. Exp.3(1), 7 (2019). doi:10.1186/s41747-018-0079-9

    work page doi:10.1186/s41747-018-0079-9 2019

  9. [9]

    M., Mosier, K

    Lu, K.-H., Liu, Z., Jaffey, D., Wo, J. M., Mosier, K. M., Cao, J., Wang, X. & Powley, T. L. Automatic assessment of human gastric motility and emptying from dynamic 3D magnetic resonance imaging. Neurogastroenterology & Motility34(1), e14239 (2022). doi:10.1111/nmo.14239

    doi:10.1111/nmo.14239 2022

  10. [10]

    P., Weiger, M., Scheidegger, M

    Pruessmann, K. P., Weiger, M., Scheidegger, M. B. & Boesiger, P. SENSE: Sensitivity en- coding for fast MRI.Magn. Reson. Med.42(5), 952–962 (1999). doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522- 2594(199911)42:5<952::AID-MRM16>3.0.CO;2-S

    doi:10.1002/(sici)1522- 1999

  11. [11]

    A., Jakob, P

    Griswold, M. A., Jakob, P. M., Heidemann, R. M., Nittka, M., Jellus, V., Wang, J., Kiefer, B. & Haase, A. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA).Magn. Reson. Med.47(6), 1202–1210 (2002). doi:10.1002/mrm.10171

    doi:10.1002/mrm.10171 2002

  12. [12]

    & Pauly, J

    Lustig, M., Donoho, D. & Pauly, J. M. Sparse MRI: The application of compressed sensing for rapid MR imaging.Magn. Reson. Med.58(6), 1182–1195 (2007). doi:10.1002/mrm.21391

    doi:10.1002/mrm.21391 2007

  13. [13]

    T., Chandarana, H., Kim, S., Xu, J., Axel, L., Sodickson, D

    Feng, L., Grimm, R., Block, K. T., Chandarana, H., Kim, S., Xu, J., Axel, L., Sodickson, D. K. & Otazo, R. Golden-angle radial sparse parallel MRI: Combination of compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and golden-angle radial sampling for fast and flexible dynamic volumetric MRI.Magn. Reson. Med.72(3), 707–717 (2014). doi:10.1002/mrm.24980

    doi:10.1002/mrm.24980 2014

  14. [14]

    & Sodickson, D

    Otazo, R., Cand` es, E. & Sodickson, D. K. Low-rank plus sparse matrix decomposition for accelerated dynamic MRI with separation of background and dynamic components.Magn. Reson. Med.73(3), 1125–1136 (2015). doi:10.1002/mrm.25240

    doi:10.1002/mrm.25240 2015

  15. [15]

    A., Vasanawala, S

    Tan, F., Zhu, X., Chan, M., Zapala, M. A., Vasanawala, S. S., Ong, F., Lustig, M. & Larson, P. E. Z. Motion-compensated low-rank reconstruction for simultaneous structural and functional UTE lung MRI.Magn. Reson. Med.90(3), 1101–1113 (2023). doi:10.1002/mrm.29703

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.29703 2023

  16. [16]

    G., Han, P., Xiao, J., Han, F., Hu, Z., Wang, N., Han, H., Ling, D

    Chen, J., Christodoulou, A. G., Han, P., Xiao, J., Han, F., Hu, Z., Wang, N., Han, H., Ling, D. C., Chang, E. L., Feng, M., Scholey, J. E., Cui, S., Li, D., Yang, W. & Fan, Z. Abdominal MR Multitasking for radiotherapy treatment planning: A motion-resolved and multicontrast 3D imaging approach.Magn. Reson. Med.93(1), 108–120 (2025). doi:10.1002/mrm.30256

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.30256 2025

  17. [17]

    W., Milani, B., Eyre, K., Raifee, M

    Yerly, J., Roy, C. W., Milani, B., Eyre, K., Raifee, M. J. & Stuber, M. High on sparsity: Interbin compensation of cardiac motion for improved assessment of left-ventricular function using 5D whole- heart MRI.Magn. Reson. Med.93(3), 975–992 (2025). doi:10.1002/mrm.30323

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.30323 2025

  18. [18]

    & Peters, D

    Contijoch, F., Rasche, V., Seiberlich, N. & Peters, D. C. The future of CMR: All-in-one vs. real-time CMR (Part 2).Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance26(1), 100998 (2024). doi:10.1016/j.jocmr.2024.100998

    arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Y., Johnson, K

    Ong, F., Zhu, X., Cheng, J. Y., Johnson, K. M., Larson, P. E. Z., Vasanawala, S. S. & Lustig, M. Extreme MRI: Large-scale volumetric dynamic imaging from continuous non-gated acquisitions. Magn. Reson. Med.84(4), 1763–1780 (2020). doi:10.1002/mrm.28235

    doi:10.1002/mrm.28235 2020

  20. [20]

    4D Golden-Angle Radial MRI at Subsecond Temporal Resolution.NMR in Biomedicine 36(2), e4844 (2023)

    Feng, L. 4D Golden-Angle Radial MRI at Subsecond Temporal Resolution.NMR in Biomedicine 36(2), e4844 (2023). doi:10.1002/nbm.4844

    doi:10.1002/nbm.4844 2023

  21. [21]

    E., Terpstra, M

    Olausson, T. E., Terpstra, M. L., Huttinga, N. R. F., Beijst, C., Blanken, N., Such´ a, D., Correia, T., Velthuis, B. K., van den Berg, C. A. T. & Sbrizzi, A. Free-running time-resolved first-pass myocardial perfusion using a multi-scale dynamics decomposition: CMR-MOTUS.Magn. Reson. Mater. Phy.(2025). doi:10.1007/s10334-025-01291-x

    doi:10.1007/s10334-025-01291-x 2025

  22. [22]

    & Ahmad, R

    Chen, C., Liu, Y., Schniter, P., Tong, M., Zareba, K., Simonetti, O., Potter, L. & Ahmad, R. OCMR (v1.0)–Open-Access Multi-Coil k-Space Dataset for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging (2020). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2008.03410. 9

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.03410 2020

  23. [23]

    Wang, C., Lyu, J., Wang, S., Qin, C., Guo, K., Zhang, X., Yu, X., Li, Y., Wang, F., Jin, J., Shi, Z., Xu, Z., Tian, Y., Hua, S., Chen, Z., Liu, M., Sun, M., Kuang, X., Wang, K., Wang, H., Li, H., Chu, Y., Yang, G., Bai, W., Zhuang, X., Wang, H., Qin, J. & Qu, X. CMRxRecon: A publicly available k-space dataset and benchmark to advance deep learning for car...

    doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03525-4 2024

  24. [24]

    van Riel, M. H. C., Heesterbeek, D. G. J., Sheombarsing, R. S. S., Froeling, M., van Leeuwen, T., van den Berg, C. A. T. & Sbrizzi, A. 4D Time-Resolved Strain Tensor Analysis Using Spectro- Dynamic MRI Reveals Muscle Activation Patterns. InProc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med., vol. 33 (2025). doi:10.58530/2025/0982

    work page doi:10.58530/2025/0982 2025

  25. [25]

    Heesterbeek, D. G. J., van Riel, M. H. C., Sheombarsing, R. S. S., van Leeuwen, T., Froeling, M., van den Berg, C. A. T. & Sbrizzi, A. Quantitative in-vivo analysis of biomechanical properties reveals tissue stiffness changes during contraction of the thigh muscles. InProc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med., vol. 33 (2025). doi:10.58530/2025/3203

    work page doi:10.58530/2025/3203 2025

  26. [26]

    & Botnar, R

    Prieto, C., Doneva, M., Usman, M., Henningsson, M., Greil, G., Schaeffter, T. & Botnar, R. M. Highly efficient respiratory motion compensated free-breathing coronary mra using golden-step Cartesian acquisition.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging41(3), 738–746 (2015). doi:10.1002/jmri.24602

    work page doi:10.1002/jmri.24602 2015

  27. [27]

    S., Ashburner, J., Smith, J

    Li, X., Morgan, P. S., Ashburner, J., Smith, J. & Rorden, C. The first step for neuroimaging data analysis: DICOM to NIfTI conversion.Journal of Neuroscience Methods264, 47–56 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.03.001

    doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.03.001 2016

  28. [28]

    & Schlaffke, L

    Rohm, M., Markmann, M., Forsting, J., Rehmann, R., Froeling, M. & Schlaffke, L. 3D Auto- mated Segmentation of Lower Leg Muscles Using Machine Learning on a Heterogeneous Dataset. Diagnostics11(10), 1747 (2021). doi:10.3390/diagnostics11101747

    work page doi:10.3390/diagnostics11101747 2021

  29. [29]

    QMRTools: a Mathematica toolbox for quantitative MRI analysis.Journal of Open Source Software4(38), 1204 (2019)

    Froeling, M. QMRTools: a Mathematica toolbox for quantitative MRI analysis.Journal of Open Source Software4(38), 1204 (2019). doi:10.21105/joss.01204

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01204 2019

  30. [30]

    J., Naegele, J

    Inati, S. J., Naegele, J. D., Zwart, N. R., Roopchansingh, V., Lizak, M. J., Hansen, D. C., Liu, C.-Y., Atkinson, D., Kellman, P., Kozerke, S., Xue, H., Campbell-Washburn, A. E., Sørensen, T. S. & Hansen, M. S. ISMRM Raw data format: A proposed standard for MRI raw datasets.Magn. Reson. Med.77(1), 411–421 (2017). doi:10.1002/mrm.26089

    work page doi:10.1002/mrm.26089 2017

  31. [31]

    & Uecker, M

    Blumenthal, M., Heide, M., Holme, C., Juschitz, M., Rapp, B., Schaten, P., Scholand, N., Tamir, J., T¨ onnes, C. & Uecker, M. mrirecon/bart: version 0.9.00.Zenodo(2023). doi:10.5281/zenodo.10277939. 10

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.10277939 2023