MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027022867 · doi:10.1002/mrm.22188

MRI using radiofrequency magnetic field phase gradients

2009· article· en· W2027022867 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan C. Sharp, Scott B. King

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear magnetic resonancePhase (matter)Magnetic fieldField (mathematics)Magnetic resonance imagingPhysicsMedicineRadiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventionally, MR images are formed by applying gradients to the main static magnetic field (B0). However, the B0 gradient equipment is expensive, power-hungry, complex, and noisy and can induce eddy currents in nearby conducting structures, including the patient. Here, we describe a new silent, B0 gradient-free MRI principle, Transmit Array Spatial Encoding (TRASE), based on phase gradients of the radio-frequency (RF) field. RF phase gradients offer a new method of k-space traversal. Echo trains using at least two different RF phase gradients allow spin phase to accumulate, causing k-space traversal. Two such RF fields provide one-dimensional imaging and three are sufficient for two-dimensional imaging. Since TRASE is a k-space method, analogues of many conventional pulse sequences are possible. Experimental results demonstrate one-dimensional and two-dimensional RF MRI and slice selection using a single-channel, transmit/receive, 0.2 T, permanent magnet, human MR system. The experimentally demonstrated spatial resolution is much higher than that provided by RF receive coil array sensitivity encoding alone but lower than generally achievable with B0 gradients. Potential applications are those in which one or more of the features of simplified equipment, lower costs, silent MRI, or the different physics of the image formation process are particularly advantageous.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations61
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207