{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022653721682847898, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008090614886731391, 'mean_word_length': 5.252525252525253, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of some gradient‐encoded volume‐selection techniques for in vivo NMR spectroscopy

Four of the techniques proposed for in vivo volume‐selected NMR spectroscopy have been compared using a simple phantom with a large background water signal which was outside the region of interest. The methods VSE, SPACE, SPARS, and DIGGER all use pulsed field gradients for spatial encoding and were tested with a symmetric and an asymmetric phantom. SPACE was used to obtain volume‐selected 1H NMR spectra of a human leg, demonstrating excellent discrimination between bone marrow and muscle. © 1987 Academic Press, Inc.