Sensitivity and Power Deposition in a High-Field Imaging Experiment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image signal-to-noise ratio and power dissipation are investigated theoretically up to 400 MHz. While the text is mathematical, the figures give insights into predictions. Hertz potential is introduced for probe modeling where charge separation cannot be ignored. Using a spherical geometry, the potential from current loops that would produce a homogeneous static B1 field is calculated; at high frequency it is shown to create an unnecessarily inhomogeneous field. However, a totally homogeneous field is shown to be unattainable. Boundary conditions are solved for circularly polarized fields, and strategies for limited shimming of the sample B1 field are then presented. A distinction is drawn between dielectric resonance and spatial field focusing. At high frequency, the region of maximum specific absorption is shown to move inside the sample and decrease. From the fields in both rotating frames, the signal-to-noise ratio is derived and compared with the traditional, low-frequency formulation. On average, it is mostly found to be slightly larger at high frequency. Nevertheless, the free induction decay is sometimes found to be annulled. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2000;12:46–67. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it