MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103741748 · doi:10.1002/cmr.b.20090

The sphere in a uniform RF field—Revisited

2007· article· en· W2103741748 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher P. Bidinosti, Emilie Chapple, M. E. Hayden

Bibliographic record

VenueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part B · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissipationMagnetic fieldSPHERESConductivityPhysicsElectromagnetic coilComputational physicsEddy currentField (mathematics)HomogeneousImaging phantomLimiting currentRange (aeronautics)Nuclear magnetic resonanceCondensed matter physicsMaterials scienceOpticsMathematicsThermodynamicsElectrodeQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider eddy current generation in weakly conducting spheres as a means to characterize RF power dissipation over the frequency range 0.1–1.2 MHz, which is relevant to MRI in very low magnetic fields. We provide a complete, yet simple, theoretical analysis of the homogeneous sphere in a uniform RF field and summarize expressions for the current density, power dissipation, and magnetic field for the limiting case of the nonmagnetic conducting sphere. Experiments are performed on spherical saline phantoms using a whole‐body B1‐coil as the RF field source. Changes in the quality factor and magnetic field profile of the coil are measured and used to extract a value for conductivity of the saline solution. This conductivity is known independently from the NaCl concentration in the phantom. Excellent agreement between the two values confirms the theoretical analysis. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part B (Magn Reson Engineering) 31B: 191–202, 2007

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part BSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207