MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075780671 · doi:10.1002/mrm.21664

Asymmetric quadrature split birdcage coil for hyperpolarized <sup>3</sup>He lung MRI at 1.5T

2008· article· en· W2075780671 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicola De Zanche, Navjeet Chhina, Kevin Teh, Chris Randell, Klaas P. Pruessmann, Jim M. Wild

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAerosol Society
KeywordsElectromagnetic coilNuclear magnetic resonanceQuadrature (astronomy)HomogeneousPhysicsResonatorBiomedical engineeringNuclear medicineComputer scienceMedicineOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An asymmetric quadrature birdcage body coil for hyperpolarized (HP) (3)He lung imaging at 1.5T is presented. The coil is designed to rest on top of the patient support and be used as a temporary insert in a clinical system. A two-part construction facilitates patient access and the asymmetric design makes maximal use of available bore space to ensure comfort. Highly homogeneous, circularly polarized RF magnetic fields are produced at 48.5 MHz using a conformal mapping method for the geometrical design, combined with an algebraic method to calculate the individual capacitance values on the birdcage coil's ladder network. Efficiency and isolation from the system's proton body coil are ensured by an integrated RF screen. The design methodology is readily applicable to other field strengths or nuclei. Improvements over existing (3)He coils were found in terms of sensitivity and transmit field homogeneity, an important feature in HP MRI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations41
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207