MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003919434 · doi:10.1115/1.1488169

MRI Gradient Coil Cylinder Sound Field Simulation and Measurement

2002· article· en· W2003919434 on OpenAlexaff
Chris K. Mechefske, Yuhua Wu, Brian K. Rutt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic coilAcousticsSound pressureCylinderSearch coilMagnetic fieldPhysicsBoundary element methodScannerNoise (video)Finite element methodPressure gradientMechanicsNuclear magnetic resonanceMaterials scienceOpticsComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringMagnetic flux

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-field, high-speed Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) generates high sound levels within and nearby the scanner. The mechanism and process that produces the gradient magnetic field (a cylindrical electro-magnet, called the gradient coil cylinder, which produces a spatially and temporally varying magnetic field inside a static background magnetic field) is the primary source of this noise. This noise can cause difficulties in verbal communication in and around the scanner, heightened patient anxiety, temporary hearing loss and possible permanent hearing impairment for health care workers and patients. In order to effectively suppress the sound radiation from the gradient coil cylinder the sound field within and nearby the gradient coil needs to be characterized This characterization may be made using an analytical solution of the sound pressure field, computational simulation, measurement analysis or some combination of these three methods. This paper presents the computational simulation and measurement results of a study of the sound radiation from a head and neck gradient coil cylinder within a 4 Tesla MRI whole body scanner. The measurement results for the sound pressure level distribution along the centerline of the gradient coil cylinder are presented. The sound pressure distributions predicted from Finite Element Analysis of the gradient coil movement during operation and subsequent Boundary Element Analysis of the sound field generated are also presented. A comparison of the measured results and the predicted results shows close agreement. Because of the extremely complex nature of the analytical solution for the gradient coil cylinder, a treatment of the analytical solution and comparison to the computational results for a simple cylinder vibrating in a purely radial direction are also presented and also show close agreement between the two methods thus validating the computational approach used with the more complex gradient coil cylinder.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations25
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207