Next Article in Journal
Debt-by-Price Ratio, End-of-Year Economic Growth, and Long-Term Prediction of Stock Returns
Next Article in Special Issue
Diffusion in Sephadex Gel Structures: Time Dependency Revealed by Multi-Sequence Acquisition over a Broad Diffusion Time Range
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Step Inertial Hybrid and Shrinking Tseng’s Algorithm with Meir–Keeler Contractions for Variational Inclusion Problems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Slices of the Anomalous Phase Cube Depict Regions of Sub- and Super-Diffusion in the Fractional Diffusion Equation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Mathematics
Volume 9
Issue 13
10.3390/math9131549
Review Report
mathematics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Fractional Order Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting in the Human Cerebral Cortex

Mathematics 2021, 9(13), 1549; https://doi.org/10.3390/math9131549
by Viktor Vegh 1,2,*, Shahrzad Moinian 1,2, Qianqian Yang 3 and David C. Reutens 1,2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Mathematics 2021, 9(13), 1549; https://doi.org/10.3390/math9131549
Submission received: 2 June 2021 / Revised: 23 June 2021 / Accepted: 28 June 2021 / Published: 1 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fractional Calculus in Magnetic Resonance)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is really well presented and the introduction provides a good overview of MRF. The results could be slightly more clear with additional and improved figures to show the parcellation sensitivity.

Line 230: There are some minor grammatical errors that I won’t point out (ex. missing commas)

Line 239: a person’s initials need not be included.

Line 245: Can you comment on the use of GRAPPA and if this has an effect on MRF sensitivity?

Line 293: include Mz(t) “shown in red”

Line 294: the R^2 looks a little off, no lines for insignificant lines of best fit? Unclear

Figure placements are not aligned with where they are mentioned in this text.

Figure 9 x-axis not visible in first row of graphs, including notches at the significance level I can’t see? As differentiating regions is an important finding I’d like to be able to see this (perhaps with an additional figure?)

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

- The abstract and conclusions should better explain fractional calculus, motivating why these is necessary for this particular application. And these explanations should be accompanied of comments on the greater applicability of fractional calculus.
- The shortcomings of fractional calculus should be highlighted in the paper. Such as the greater computational complexity. How is the long memory effect handled in the paper?
- Why the Caputo definition was chosen for the paper? (as opposed to the other fractional derivative definitions).
- Overall it has to be better justified why the proposed approach was chosen in the first place (prior to testing it).
- In Fig 8 it is not clear how many outliers are there (in red). Also, why so many outliers? It would be convenient to add to the figure the position of all the points (RMSR) besides the boxplot. Further, please specify the size of the whiskers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I do not have further comments.

Back to TopTop