Year-end party

At the intersection of academia (knowledge) and industry (accountability), 

Embodying diversity and integrity, 

Living impact and not just tallying it, 

Here is the GE Research MRI Lab, with candles lit! 

11.7T in Korea

 11.7T MRI magnet in Song-do, South Korea is at field! Prof. Kyoung-Nam Kim, who kindly provided a tour of the facility, says the field is stable, homogeneous, and the first NMR signal is expected any day. Given the long delay in progress at the French site, this Gacheon University scanner may not be much behind in the race for the first human image at this field. The magnet bore for this system is relatively small (60 cm before gradient)[Correction: 70cm is the magnet bore according to a 2025 publication], but human imaging is not out of the question if paired with an appropriate insert gradient coil.

DIANA debate in one figure

 This comparison figure from the Minnesota workshop says it all. On one side, Prof. Park (upper image) continues to break ground with new data, and moves DIANA forward with full sincerity, humility, and transparency of a mature scientist; while on the other side, the petty old man (not shown here) is on a negative campaign to undermine the other's credibility with not only malice and selfish intent but also cowardice of hiding behind big names (such as shown here, Dr. Bandettini). I know full well the intention of both sides. Apart from science, this battle cannot be won by the petty old man on a purely moral ground. 

Biennial ultrahigh-field MRI workshop in U. Minnesota

The workshop was held in a small auditorium/lecture room from Oct 12-14, with remote listen-in allowed for paid registrants. Remote attendance option in many such occasions is a notable positive change since the pandemic. The morning session of the second day covered MRI systems engineering, providing opportunity to hear about latest development or lack thereof from a few well-known speakers. My summary from the first 4 talks of the session is:

1. The French 11.74T system has identified resistive 3rd order shim coils coupling to the gradient coils as the primary source of image artifacts. They also found that other UHF MRI systems employing the same (Siemens SC72) gradient coil exhibited similar behavior. I am sure this will spur much discussion on the coupling issues, potentially exacerbated by vibration, between various non-RF coils in MRI.

2. Baby MRI researcher at 7T reported successful use of MR-based electrical properties tomography to estimate permittivity of infant brains.

3. Siemens's most powerful head-only gradient coils were apparently designed in Massachusetts General Hospital. The presenter incorrectly said that BEM is the industry standard method of gradient coil design. He also repeated what I think is a misleading statement that their design reduced PNS - peripheral nerve stimulation - in 4 out of 5 scan positions tested. The statement gives an impression that the 5 positions were selected randomly, while I believe they selected lowest-risk ones.

4. Brian Rutt continues to work with Minnesota team to provide a head-only gradient coil to fit inside a whole-body gradient coil that is in Minnesota's 10.5T scanner. He covered a broad range of topics including Comsol-based MGI simulation. He talked about an ultimate head gradient coil (reducing both PNS and MGI) as a work-in-progress.

The first day's schedule included Prof. Jang-Yeon Park's DIANA talk. I missed that one, but hope that the DIANA work will overcome a flurry of ego-driven criticisms (particularly instigated by one sore, petty old man) and be known for its true potential.

PS. The Workshop organizers kindly made recordings of presentations and Q&A available on-line until Nov. 9th. In the recording, Peter Bandettini was not being objective - he was politely but clearly siding with the petty man. It wasn't like him when he said "how can a higher-field be worse?", and when he repeatedly said a real signal will ALWAYS show up as number of averages goes up. It is unbelievable that a person with his expertise said something so obviously non-obvious so confidently. Fortunately two people from the audience brought these points up, and predictably he could not give a clear answer. Something is not right here. In a sense, I saw hope.

University of Wisconsin, Madison

University of Wisconsin-Madison is about to be the latest site to have the GE Magnus gradient system for 3T human brain imaging. As of now the scanner is being installed in the Waisman center which is home to UW Madison's developmental and neurodegenerative brain research. The Center, established in 1973, has just celebrated its 50th anniversary. Hopefully this latest brain imager developed by GE Research will help usher in another exciting half century of cutting-edge research at Waisman.

[PS] Tom Foo's LinkedIn page:

 https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7113495889494568961/

News from Univ. Iowa MRI center

The MRI Research Facility of University of Iowa (Director: Prof. Vince Magnotta) had the following LinkedIn post regarding the latest addition to their high-performance research MRI fleet.

(11) Post | Feed | LinkedIn

This is the first installation of the GE-developed MAGNUS 3T head-only system in a university. The next, at University of Wisconsin-Madison, is coming up in September. More news to come!

Great meeting and not-so-great moments in Toronto

 Last time when the conference was held without fear of virus was 2019 -- 4 years ago! Naturally, therefore, the ISMRM annual meeting in Toronto was teeming with smiles and laughter, excitements and curiosity. While fully in-person, the conference allowed on-line participation in oral sessions, many of which were also recorded live for off-hour viewing. Such recording effectively allowed to circumvent the limitation of massively parallel sessions. The general organization of the meeting, on the other hand, left some room for improvement, something to be desired. Maybe the committee needs a little bit of time to catch up and adjust in the post-Covid conferencing environment? A few not-so-great things that come to my mind were the following.

- Session assignment for some abstracts was questionable. For example, a magnet development poster (compact 7T, #4586) was put in an RF coils section.

- Three of my poster presentations (#4560, 4566, 4569), were put into a single, one-hour digital poster session.

- Digital poster presentation using muted pre-recorded video was difficult and annoying. A ppt file should have been available for viewing and presentation instead.

- Navigating digital poster session floor was very difficult. There was no easy way to match computer numbers (displayed physically) and program numbers (how citations were done).

- Moderator instruction/guideline was inadequate. A first-time moderator would not have known what to do. A clearer guidance should have been given regarding handling of questions submitted on-line.

[PS] In terms of fear of virus, unfortunately several participants that I know got COVID during/after the conference. The new reality defined by the pandemic certainly made itself known this time.