MR compatibility of EEG scalp electrodes at 4 tesla
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To design and apply a method to quantitatively evaluate the MR compatibility of electroencephalographic (EEG) scalp electrodes based on pulse sequence-independent metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three types of electrodes (constructed primarily of brass, silver, and conductive plastic, respectively) were tested. B0 field distortions, B1 shielding, and heat induction was measured in adjacent agarose and oil phantoms at 4 T. B0 field maps were corrected for distortions caused by the measurement apparatus and passive shim heating, and projections perpendicular to the surfaces of the electrodes were fit, generating cubic coefficients representing the electrode distortion severity. Signal loss in T2-weighted images was used to determine B1 shielding by the electrodes. Temperature measurements were recorded during the application of a high-power pulse sequence. RESULTS: Significantly different B0 distortions were observed in the three types of electrodes. The B1 shielding detected in all three electrodes is minimal for most human MRI, and no significant heating was detected in the electrodes or adjacent phantom. CONCLUSION: The three types of electrodes were successfully differentiated in terms of MR compatibility based on pulse sequence-independent B0 field distortions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".