MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623910670 · doi:10.3390/act6020020

Measuring the Temperature Increase of an Ultrasonic Motor in a 3-Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging System

2017· article· en· W2623910670 on OpenAlexafffund
Peyman Shokrollahi, James M. Drake, A.A. Goldenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueActuators · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsUltrasonic motorMaterials scienceScannerNuclear magnetic resonanceUltrasonic sensorMagnetic resonance imagingTemperature measurementRotating magnetic fieldBiomedical engineeringMagnetic fieldAcousticsPhysicsOpticsComposite materialRadiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to evaluate the temperature increase caused by a 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system on an ultrasonic motor (USM) used to actuate surgical robots in the MRI environment. Four fiber-optic temperature sensors were attached to the USM. Temperature was monitored outside the five-Gauss boundary and then inside the bore for 20 min while the USM was powered on. The USM temperature was tested for two states of the scanner, “off” and “on”, by employing common clinical imaging sequences and echo planar imaging sequences. The USM showed a slight temperature increase while operating in the static field of the MRI. A considerable temperature increase (~10 °C) was observed when the scanner was on. The temperature increased to 60 °C, which is beyond the acceptable safe temperature and can result in thermal burns. Most of the temperature increase (80%) was due to effects of the static field on the motion of the rotating parts of the motor, while the remainder (20%) derived from heat deposited in the conductive components of the USM due to radiofrequency pulses and gradient field changes. To solve the temperature increase, the metal components of the USM’s case can be replaced by silicon carbide.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActuatorsSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207