MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043098997 · doi:10.1002/mrm.21063

Multiple‐region gradient arrays for extended field of view, increased performance, and reduced nerve stimulation in magnetic resonance imaging

2006· article· en· W2043098997 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dennis L. Parker, J. Rock Hadley

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringRobarts Research InstituteUniversity of Utah
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear magnetic resonanceElectromagnetic coilPhysicsTransverse planeSIGNAL (programming language)Magnetic fieldComputer scienceOpticsMaterials scienceAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a novel design for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) gradient systems. This design may allow the development of MRI scanners that are capable of imaging large regions with high performance while minimizing the potential for nerve stimulation. The general concept of the gradient system is that spatial oscillation is incorporated such that each gradient coil creates multiple, approximately linear gradient regions that oscillate in gradient polarity. Separate radiofrequency (RF) coil arrays are designed to be sensitive to the signals within each linear region and thus allow signal measurements to be obtained separately from each region. Enabling image acquisition in the transition region that separates each pair of adjacent linear regions requires a second gradient system with imaging regions that overlap and coincide with the transition regions of the first gradient system. Imaging the extended field of view (FOV) is accomplished by interleaved operation of the two gradient systems. Simulated annealing is used to create designs for both longitudinal and transverse gradient systems with two imaging regions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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