This is great. There is a lot of work being done to figure out how much undersampling you can do on a typical MRI and reconstruct a good image. For typical scan

This is great. There is a lot of work being done to figure out how much undersampling you can do on a typical MRI and reconstruct a good image. For typical scanners, this gets you faster scan times. It will be interesting to see how much those techniques translate into taking a super low-powered MRI and allow it to yield decent images. Whether or not such techniques are good for accurately detecting lesions seems to still be a bit of an open question. (It's less relevant to my particular research interests for now, but obviously extremely important for clinical use.) A lot of the fallout from over-imaging (especially when, like MRI, there is no ionizing radiation so the test itself isn't harmful) is due to physician behavior and standards of care. But those behaviors and standards can change over time. A bit tangential, but I suspect that at some point, we will think it anachronistic that cardiologists tried to visualize the heart's function by listening to its sounds with their ears.