Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Accurate quantification of in vivo31P NMR signals using the variable projection method and prior knowledge

van der Veen, J. W. C., de Beer, R., Luyten, P. R., van Ormondt, D.·1988·Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Abstract

Free induction decay signals are analyzed by fitting a model function directly in the time domain. No starting values are needed for linear model parameters, and omission of corrupted data points poses no problems. A significant gain of accuracy is achieved by imposing prior knowledge about the model parameters. © 1988 Academic Press, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mrm.1910060111

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 363

Metadata

Authors
van der Veen, J. W. C., de Beer, R., Luyten, P. R., & van Ormondt, D.
Venue
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
92-98
ISSN
  • 0740-3194 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-2594
OpenAlex
W2016996526
Cited by
363
References
0
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accurate quantification of in vivo31P NMR signals using the variable projection method and prior knowledge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mrm.1910060111
The paper
van der Veen, J. W. C., de Beer, R., Luyten, P. R., & van Ormondt, D. (1988). Accurate quantification of in vivo31P NMR signals using the variable projection method and prior knowledge. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1910060111

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.