{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03139013452914798, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007623318385650224, 'mean_word_length': 4.794805194805194, '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}}
Spatial dependence of a differential shading artifact in images from coil arrays with reactive cross-talk at 1.5 T.

Reactive cross-talk causes leakage of the reception signal between neighboring coils of a receiver array. We present here experimental and computer-simulated NMR images (based upon a simple theory) to show, for an array of two coils, that the leakage (or secondary) signal is combined phase sensitively with the primary signal in each coil, to produce (in certain geometries) a differential shading artifact, manifest as a divot of missing intensity in the image derived from one (and only one) of the two coils. The asymmetry of this effect arises from the sense of the nuclear precession, and the afflicted coil may be swapped with its mate by reversing the direction of the static magnetic field. The artifact appears most clearly in transaxial images and is shown to be forbidden in certain types of saggital images. In a simplified theory for an array of two meshes (i.e., with only two degrees of freedom) the severity of the artifact depends upon the normalized coefficient of coupling (denoted eta and related to the cross-talk in decibels, psi, by psi=-20 log eta.) While the presence of input trap circuits in a typical array doubles the degrees of freedom and complicates both the circuit theory and the circuit measurements, the cross-talk is nonetheless shown to be given by an expression of the form psi=-20 log eta', where the new primed parameter eta' embodies the impedance-matching capacitance and the resistance of the scanner's preamplifiers, as well as the mutual reactance responsible for the cross-talk. The values of cross-talk inferred from the computer simulations of the image artifact are somewhat higher (by an estimated 3 to 6 dB) than those obtained by bench top measurements; but, given that the simulations unmistakably reproduce the unique and highly characteristic visual appearance of the artifact, the proposed model for its formation is claimed to be essentially correct. Finally, it is suggested that the artifact could be corrected by means of the filtered, edge-completed, reception profile described by Wald and co-workers (Wald et al., Magn. Reson. Med. 34, 433 (1995)).