Add links up to fig 2

index.html

@@ -23,22 +23,25 @@ <h2>The relaxometry hype cycle</h2>
 <p>
 Back when I accepted I told myself I really need to change the title, as it is too broad and has too many ampersands. However, as with most reminders I have set since 2020, this one is still on my to-do list, and the ISMRM conference proceedings wait for no one.
 </p>
-So here I am stuck with a title that reads more like an editorial than an educational talk. There are three questions I am supposed to answer (where, why, how), each one in the affirmative (it is used) and in the negative (is not used), producing a total of six sub-topics for a twenty minute presentation. Initially I was going to give an update to our 10-year old review of relaxometry applications, but instead I decided to go ahead with something more free-flowing, ampersands be damned! 
 
 <p>
-Relaxometry is a field with a glorious and controversial history, and no 20–minute slide deck will ever do it justice. It is full of egos and inventions, patents and lawsuits, high expectations and deep disillusionments. Rather than a slide dedicated to each of these, I want to give it an impressionistic overview, painted over with a coat of personal opinions and ruminations about the future of the field.
+So here I am stuck with a title that reads more like an editorial than an educational talk. There are three questions I am supposed to answer (where, why, how), each one in the affirmative (it is used) and in the negative (is not used), producing a total of six sub-topics for a twenty minute presentation. Initially I was going to give an update to our 10-year old <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/jmri.23718">review</a> of relaxometry applications, but instead I decided to go ahead with something more free-flowing, ampersands be damned! 
 </p>
 
 <p>
-In doing so, I was inspired by my student Agâh Karakuzu, whose stellar PhD thesis reminded me how fun MR history is, while also teaching me facts that every aspiring relaxometer (is that a word?) needs to know. Many of the examples in this blog post are taken from Agah’s thesis, which recently won a special mention at the Polytechnique graduate thesis competition. I encourage you all to read it!
+Relaxometry is a field with a <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)15182-3/fulltext">glorious and controversial history</a>, and no 20–minute slide deck will ever do it justice. It is full of egos and inventions, patents and lawsuits, high expectations and deep disillusionments. Rather than a slide dedicated to each of these, I want to give it an impressionistic overview, painted over with a coat of personal opinions and ruminations about the future of the field.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In doing so, I was inspired by my student Agâh Karakuzu, whose stellar <a href="https://publications.polymtl.ca/10224/">PhD thesis</a> reminded me how fun MR history is, while also teaching me facts that every aspiring relaxometer (is that a word?) needs to know. Many of the examples in this blog post are taken from Agah’s <a href="https://publications.polymtl.ca/10224/">thesis</a>, which recently won a special mention at the Polytechnique graduate thesis competition. I encourage you all to read it!
 </p>
 
 <p>
 THE RELAXOMETRY HYPE CYCLE
 </p>
 
 <p>
-For those unfamiliar with the Garther hype cycle, here's a brief recap. The cycle starts with a technology trigger and goes through a phase of unrealistically inflated expectations. Eventually the hype dies down as implementations fail to deliver on their promise, and disillusionment sets in. Technologies that manage to live through the trough reach the slope of enlightenment, when there is a flurry of second and third generation products that make the initial promise feel feasible again. Finally we reach the slope of productivity, where mainstream adoption takes off, and more incremental progress is made, eventually reaching steady state in terms of the technology's visibility.
+For those unfamiliar with the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle">Garther hype cycle</a>, here's a brief recap. The cycle starts with a technology trigger and goes through a phase of unrealistically inflated expectations. Eventually the hype dies down as implementations fail to deliver on their promise, and disillusionment sets in. Technologies that manage to live through the trough reach the slope of enlightenment, when there is a flurry of second and third generation products that make the initial promise feel feasible again. Finally we reach the slope of productivity, where mainstream adoption takes off, and more incremental progress is made, eventually reaching steady state in terms of the technology's visibility.
 </p>
 
 <img src="im1.png" width="600">
@@ -49,15 +52,15 @@ <h2>The relaxometry hype cycle</h2>
 </p>
 
 <p>
-In the context of relaxometry, there is no doubt that the technology trigger is the invention of NMR and its ability to measure relaxation times. Researchers have been using NMR to characterize chemical compounds since the 1930s, but it was the insight of using in vivo relaxometry to tell a cancerous tissue sample from a healthy one, that gave birth to MRI. In 1970 Look and Locker published their seminal paper on measuring relaxation times with NMR, and in 1971 Damadian published a study on the use of NMR-based T1 and T2 values for detecting malignant tumors (Damadian, 1971). Based on this work, he issued a patent application titled “an apparatus and method for detecting cancer in tissue” in 1972, which was accepted in 1974 (Damadian, 1974).
+In the context of relaxometry, there is no doubt that the technology trigger is the invention of NMR and its ability to measure relaxation times. Researchers have been using NMR to characterize chemical compounds since the 1930s, but it was the insight of using in vivo relaxometry to tell a cancerous tissue sample from a healthy one, that gave birth to MRI. In 1970 Look and Locker published their <a href="https://pubs.aip.org/aip/rsi/article-abstract/41/2/250/304593/Time-Saving-in-Measurement-of-NMR-and-EPR">seminal paper</a> on measuring relaxation times with NMR, and in 1971 Damadian published a study on the use of NMR-based T1 and T2 values for detecting malignant tumors (<a href="https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.171.3976.1151">Damadian</a>, 1971). Based on this work, he issued a patent application titled “an apparatus and method for detecting cancer in tissue” in 1972, which was accepted in 1974 (<a href="https://patents.google.com/patent/US3789832A/en">Damadian, 1974</a>).
 </p>
 
 <p>
 <i>Inflated expectations</i>
 </p>
 
 <p>
-With undeniable insight from the studies of Lauterbur and Mansfield, Damadian’s team built the first human MRI scanner in 1978 and made it commercially available in two years. This scanner was essentially a relaxometry device, using T1 and T2 measurements to create a malignancy index and to distinguish between cancerous and non-cancerous tissue. One could argue that the end of the 70s is the peak of inflated expectations, as many researchers believed that the future of MRI is relaxometry. Yet around the same time, GE started manufacturing scanners without paying royalty to Damadian as consideration for his patent. In the decade that followed, GE sold nearly 600 scanners, for which Damadian’s company Fonar filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the late 1990s and was awarded $128,705,766 as compensation for pecuniary damages.
+With undeniable insight from the studies of Lauterbur and Mansfield, Damadian’s team built the first human MRI scanner in 1978 and made it commercially available in two years. This scanner was essentially a relaxometry device, using T1 and T2 measurements to create a malignancy index and to distinguish between cancerous and non-cancerous tissue. One could argue that the end of the 70s is the peak of inflated expectations, as many researchers believed that the future of MRI is relaxometry. Yet around the same time, GE started manufacturing scanners without paying royalty to Damadian as consideration for his patent. In the decade that followed, GE sold nearly 600 scanners, for which Damadian’s company Fonar filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the late 1990s and was awarded $128,705,766 as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonar_Corp._v._General_Electric_Co.">compensation</a> for pecuniary damages.
 </p>
 
 <p>