MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996893984 · doi:10.1002/cmr.b.20187

Improving signal‐to‐noise ratio of hyperpolarized noble gas MR imaging at 73.5 mT using multiturn Litz wire radiofrequency receive coils

2011· article· en· W1996893984 on OpenAlexafffund
M Carias, William Dominguez‐Viqueira, Giles Santyr

Bibliographic record

VenueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part B · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear magnetic resonanceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)SIGNAL (programming language)PhysicsMaterials scienceMedicineRadiologyOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hyperpolarized noble gases ( 3 He, 129 Xe) are used in Magnetic Resonance imaging as inhaled contrast agents to visualize the lung. Because the magnetization derived from hyperpolarization is independent of magnetic field strength, low magnetic fields can be used, where coil noise dominates over sample noise. It has been shown previously that signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) of hyperpolarized 129 Xe rat lung images can be improved with the use of saddle‐shaped radiofrequency receive coils constructed of Litz wire in a single layer with up to 20 turns. Increased number of turns is expected to provide additional sensitivity. In this work, coils of the same geometry were built using Litz wire with either the addition of more turns (up to 48) or the addition of two layers and compared using water phantoms. It is shown that the addition of 48 turns in a single layer provided a 42% increase in SNR, when compared to the 20 turns, whereas the dual‐layered approach provided no measurable benefit. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part B (Magn Reson Engineering) 39B:37–42, 2011

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part BSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207