MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141344895 · doi:10.1002/cmr.b.20118

RF coil loading measurements between 1 and 50 MHz to guide field‐cycled MRI system design

2008· article· en· W2141344895 on OpenAlexaff
Kyle M. Gilbert, Timothy J. Scholl, Blaine A. Chronik

Bibliographic record

VenueConcepts in Magnetic Resonance Part B · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic coilMagnetRadiofrequency coilResistive touchscreenMagnetic fieldNuclear magnetic resonanceSample (material)Superconducting magnetAcousticsLarmor precessionEmphasis (telecommunications)Radio frequencyField (mathematics)ScannerComputer sciencePhysicsElectrical engineeringOpticsTelecommunicationsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) uses a single superconducting magnet both to polarize the nuclear magnetic moments in a sample and to provide the magnetic field environment under which an image is acquired. In field‐cycled MRI (FCMRI), these two tasks are independently accomplished by two actively controlled resistive magnets. As a result, the expressions for signal‐to‐noise ratio for an FCMRI system, as with other systems making use of prepolarization techniques (such as hyperpolarized noble gas MRI), are fundamentally different than those of a conventional system. Once losses in the receiver coil are dominated by contributions from the sample, there is little benefit to increasing the receive frequency. The added freedom to independently vary the two field strengths can lead to substantial relative improvements in SNR over a range of Larmor frequencies, while precluding the difficulties associated with the operation of high‐field systems. Radiofrequency coil loading measurements were recorded over a frequency range of 1–50 MHz. The optimal frequency range for an FCMRI scanner intended for small animal imaging was determined to be between 5 and 48 MHz, depending on the given receiver coil and sample conductivity. The implication of these results on the design of systems employing prepolarization techniques is provided, with an emphasis being placed on the design and operation of FCMRI systems. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part B (Magn Reson Engineering) 33B: 177–191, 2008

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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