SAR reduction in 7T C‐spine imaging using a “dark modes” transmit array strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Local specific absorption rate (SAR) limits many applications of parallel transmit (pTx) in ultra high-field imaging. In this Note, we introduce the use of an array element, which is intentionally inefficient at generating spin excitation (a "dark mode") to attempt a partial cancellation of the electric field from those elements that do generate excitation. We show that adding dipole elements oriented orthogonal to their conventional orientation to a linear array of conventional loop elements can lower the local SAR hotspot in a C-spine array at 7 T. METHODS: We model electromagnetic fields in a head/torso model to calculate SAR and excitation B1 (+) patterns generated by conventional loop arrays and loop arrays with added electric dipole elements. We utilize the dark modes that are generated by the intentional and inefficient orientation of dipole elements in order to reduce peak 10g local SAR while maintaining excitation fidelity. RESULTS: For B1 (+) shimming in the spine, the addition of dipole elements did not significantly alter the B1 (+) spatial pattern but reduced local SAR by 36%. CONCLUSION: The dipole elements provide a sufficiently complimentary B1 (+) and electric field pattern to the loop array that can be exploited by the radiofrequency shimming algorithm to reduce local SAR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".