MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gradient-induced acoustic and magnetic field fluctuations in a 4T whole-body MR imager

2000· article· en· W2128536883 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuhua Wu, Blaine A. Chronik, Chris Bowen, Chris K. Mechefske, Brian K. Rutt

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetic fieldNuclear magnetic resonanceAcousticsField (mathematics)MathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both the acoustic and magnetic fluctuation frequency response functions for a Siemens AS25 body gradient coil inside a 4 Tesla whole-body MR system were measured and analyzed in this study. In an attempt to correlate the acoustic noise inside the gradient coil with magnetic field oscillations, triangular and trapezoidal gradient impulses of varying amplitudes and widths were used to excite the gradient coil. The acoustic and magnetic responses to these inputs were measured. The results show the existence of discrete resonances in both acoustic and uniform magnetic field fluctuation spectra, while gradient magnetic field fluctuation spectra show no such resonances. In addition, the dominant amplitude peaks in spectra fluctuate similarly with respect to trapezoidal gradient impulse flat-top widths. This implies that these phenomena are correlated, and that the trapezoidal impulse flat-top width may be used as a way to suppress both acoustic noise and uniform magnetic field oscillations.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations65
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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