MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999024888 · doi:10.1002/cmr.b.21220

Electromagnet design allowing explicit and simultaneous control of minimum wire spacing and field uniformity

2012· article· en· W1999024888 on OpenAlexaff
Chad Harris, William B. Handler, Blaine A. Chronik

Bibliographic record

VenueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part B · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Photolithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic coilWeightingPower (physics)Field (mathematics)DissipationHead (geology)Boundary (topology)Function (biology)ElectromagnetAlgorithmComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)MagnetMathematicsAcousticsMechanical engineeringEngineeringControl (management)PhysicsElectrical engineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An adaptive algorithm is presented that works to independently and explicitly control both local power deposition and magnetic field uniformity in a robust, automated manner. The only inputs to the algorithm are the minimum allowable wire spacing, the maximum allowable field error, and the geometry over which to produce the coil. To highlight the function of the algorithm, two examples are investigated: a transverse gradient coil insert, designed for imaging the head and neck; and a highly uniform, low‐power, B0 field coil. Both examples require highly optimized relative weighting between power dissipation and field uniformity. The algorithm is described and implemented in terms of the boundary element method for coil design. The algorithm is shown to produce acceptable designs; conforming to engineering constraints, for both instances within a matter of minutes. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part B (Magn Reson Engineering) 41B: 120–129, 2012

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part BSame topicAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207