Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Magn Reson. 2011 Jul 23;212(2):280–288. doi: 10.1016/j.jmr.2011.07.005

Fig. 4. MUTLI-SLICE COMPARISON OF SHIMMING METHODS.

Fig. 4

Comparison of zero through third order static SH, DSH and DMC shimming for axial multi-slice shimming of the human brain at 7 Tesla. Before shimming, a combination of shallow, large-scale field components and localized, high-amplitude field foci was observed (first row). Static SH shimming was capable of removing the shallow terms (second row) and DSH shimming furthermore minimized some of the localized components (third row). Theoretical DMC shimming (fourth row) performed equally well in slices with shallow components only (dorsal and ventral slices) and outperformed DSH shimming in slices that contained more complex field artifacts (center slices). Experimentally measured magnetic field distributions in the presence of DMC shimming (fifth row) proved the theoretical concept and outperformed DSH shimming (compare Table 1).