MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sensitivity and Power Deposition in a High-Field Imaging Experiment

2000· review· en· W2022103098 on OpenAlexaff
D. I. Hoult

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsField (mathematics)Computational physicsDielectricSensitivity (control systems)SIGNAL (programming language)Power (physics)Noise (video)HomogeneousExcitationElectromagnetic fieldOpticsDissipationBoundary value problemNuclear magnetic resonanceStatistical physicsImage (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematicsOptoelectronicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image signal-to-noise ratio and power dissipation are investigated theoretically up to 400 MHz. While the text is mathematical, the figures give insights into predictions. Hertz potential is introduced for probe modeling where charge separation cannot be ignored. Using a spherical geometry, the potential from current loops that would produce a homogeneous static B1 field is calculated; at high frequency it is shown to create an unnecessarily inhomogeneous field. However, a totally homogeneous field is shown to be unattainable. Boundary conditions are solved for circularly polarized fields, and strategies for limited shimming of the sample B1 field are then presented. A distinction is drawn between dielectric resonance and spatial field focusing. At high frequency, the region of maximum specific absorption is shown to move inside the sample and decrease. From the fields in both rotating frames, the signal-to-noise ratio is derived and compared with the traditional, low-frequency formulation. On average, it is mostly found to be slightly larger at high frequency. Nevertheless, the free induction decay is sometimes found to be annulled.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations466
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207