MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design and fabrication of a three-axis edge ROU head and neck gradient coil

2000· article· en· W1978675675 on OpenAlexafffund
Blaine A. Chronik, Andrew Alejski, Brian K. Rutt

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsHead (geology)FabricationElectromagnetic coilHead and neckNuclear magnetic resonanceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMaterials sciencePhysicsGeologyComputer scienceMedicineTelecommunicationsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design, fabrication, and testing of a complete three-axis gradient coil capable of imaging the human neck is described. The analytic method of constrained current minimum inductance (CCMI) was used to position the uniform region of the gradient coil adjacent to and extending beyond the physical edge of the coil. The average gradient efficiency of the three balanced axes is 0.37 mT/m/A and the average inductance is 827 microH. With maximum amplifier current of 200A and receive signal sweep width of +/-125 kHz, the average minimum FOV using this gradient set is 7.9 cm. The completed coil has an inner diameter of 32 cm, an outer diameter of 42 cm, and a length (including cabling connections) of 80 cm. The entire coil was built in-house. The structure is actively water cooled. Heating measurements were made to characterize the thermal response of the coil under various operating conditions and it was determined that a continuous current of 100A could be passed through all three axes simultaneously without increasing the internal coil temperature by more than 23 degrees C. Eddy current measurements were made for all axes. With digital compensation, the gradient eddy current components could be adequately compensated. A large B(o) eddy current field is produced by the Gz axis that could be corrected through the use of an auxiliary B(o) compensation coil. Preliminary imaging results are shown in both phantoms and human subjects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207