Performance of a petal resonator surface (PERES) coil via equivalent circuit simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MRI coil parameters can be estimated via simulation using an equivalent RLC circuit to investigate coil performance. The Spice Opus simulator was used to simulate the loss return coefficients of a circular-shaped coil and a petal resonator surface (PERES) coil via equivalent (RLC) circuit. Simulated coefficient spectra were obtained and compared with experimentally-acquired spectra generated by both coils. From these spectra, resonant modes and quality factors of both coil prototypes were computed at 64 MHz and compared. Impedance and resonant frequency of the 8 petal-PERES coil design were computed and compared against those obtained with the circuit simulation. PERES coil design produced an impedance value of 54 , and an experimental resonant frequency differing by less than 1% from that predicted by the circuit simulator. The quality factor of the coil prototype differs by only 8% from that obtained with the simulation method. Due to construction imperfections in the coil design, it showed a drop of 8.84 dB in attenuation compared with the simulation results obtained with the aid of an equivalent circuit. This scheme may serve as an alternative to the trial-and-error method usually used to develop dedicated RF coils for magnetic resonance imaging
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".