ArticleCommunications biology2025
Implicit neural representations for accurate estimation of the Standard Model of white matter.
Article in Communications biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implicit neural representations for accurate estimation of the Standard Model of white matter.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) enables non-invasive investigation of tissue microstructure. The Standard Model (SM) of white matter aims to disentangle dMRI signal contributions from intra- and extra-axonal water compartments. However, due to the model's high-dimensional nature, accurately estimating its parameters poses a complex problem and remains an active field of research, in which different (machine learning) strategies have been proposed. This work introduces an estimation framework based on implicit neural representations (INRs), which incorporate spatial regularization through the sinusoidal encoding of the input coordinates. The INR method is evaluated on both synthetic and in vivo datasets and compared to existing methods. Results demonstrate superior accuracy of the INR method in estimating SM parameters, particularly in low signal-to-noise conditions. Additionally, spatial upsampling of the INR can represent the underlying dataset anatomically plausibly in a continuous way. The INR is self-supervised, eliminating the need for labeled training data. It achieves fast inference, is robust to noise, supports joint estimation of SM kernel parameters and the fiber orientation distribution function with spherical harmonics orders up to at least 8, and accommodates gradient non-uniformity corrections. The combination of these properties positions INRs as a potentially important tool for analyzing and interpreting diffusion MRI data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.