. 2020 Jun 2;37(1):549–563. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2020.1761462

Table 2.

Summary of all metrics assessing the performance of the RF-applicators, including the worst reflection and coupling coefficients (column 1, ‘Scattering’), the Hyperthermia Treatment Planning (HTP) results using the power optimization (column 2, ‘Power optimization’), the HTP results using the uniformity optimization (column 3, ‘Uniformity Optimization’) with # indicating the number of additive excitation phase and amplitude settings as well as the results of the B₁⁺ shimming (column 4, ‘MRI’) for the small tumor model (top half) and the large tumor model (bottom half).

	Scattering		Power optimization									Uniformity optimization									MRI
	S_ii,max (dB)	S_ij,max (dB)	#	SAR_10g,max(TV) ( $\frac{W}{kg}$ )	SAF	TC_SAR>Lim (%)	P_Head (W)	P_Tumor (W)	PI ( $\frac{W}{kg}$ )	TC_25% (%)	HTQ	#	SAR_10g,max(TV) ( $\frac{W}{kg}$ )	SAF	TC_SAR>Lim (%)	P_Head (W)	P_Tumor (W)	PI ( $\frac{W}{kg}$ )	TC_25% (%)	HTQ	B₁⁺ ( $\frac{μT}{\sqrt{k g \cdot W}}$ )	COV (%)

Small tumor model
Design 1	–32.5	–12.5	2	46.7	2.8	36.0	74.2	1.5	47	100	1.00	2	43.8	2.4	18.9	81.2	1.4	20	100	1.04	0.25	21.7
Design 2	–89.5	–30	1	51.4	2.7	47.2	86.2	1.6	66	100	0.90	2	48.5	2.2	57.4	104.2	1.6	62	100	0.92	0.21	19.2
Design 3	–71.5	–19.5	1	53.9	3.6	65.3	70.9	1.7	126	100	0.84	2	53.1	3.1	77.2	85.8	1.8	127	100	0.84	0.14	16.4
Design 4	–91	–30.5	1	56.3	3.4	73.3	77.0	1.8	140	100	0.79	2	54.8	3.0	72.9	86.1	1.8	120	100	0.82	0.13	17.4
Design 5	–97	–28.5	2	59.0	4.6	65.5	55.1	1.8	178	100	0.81	2	57.4	3.5	66.9	75.9	1.8	135	100	0.84	0.08	14.3
Design 6	–110	–40.5	2	59.3	3.0	66.7	64.6	1.7	152	100	0.83	2	50.4	3.3	59.9	72.1	1.6	99	100	0.88	0.14	17.5
Design 7	–66	–20	2	57.1	4.6	73.0	47.6	1.5	191	100	0.77	2	51.9	3.5	69.9	70.1	1.7	125	100	0.85	0.02	11.0
Design 8	–67.5	–17.5	1	51.3	4.1	55.4	51.3	1.6	116	100	0.88	2	46.4	2.6	43.8	82.5	1.5	52	100	0.97	0.04	9.9
Design 9	–77.5	–29.5	1	55.8	6.2	70.6	38.5	1.8	244	100	0.83	1	53.0	5.1	65.2	44.2	1.7	178	100	0.87	0.08	24.1
Design 10	–73	–27.5	1	56.6	6.6	74.6	36.6	1.8	277	100	0.82	1	53.6	5.6	63.5	40.1	1.7	191	100	0.88	0.04	25.3
Large tumor model
Design 1	–62	–21.5	2	57.3	2.0	18.8	84.1	13.6	21	100	1.21	2	45.2	1.8	3.2	87.5	12.2	3	100	1.28	0.59	28.1
Design 2	–85.5	–30.5	2	73.4	2.0	37.2	104.5	16.6	55	100	0.97	2	48.1	2.0	4.6	73.4	11.6	4	100	1.11	0.05	25.1
Design 3	–88.5	–32.5	2	96.4	2.7	45.5	87.0	18.3	117	93	0.86	2	82.4	2.4	47.5	97.2	18.0	93	100	0.92	0.05	20.1
Design 4	–88.5	–32	1	94.8	2.9	43.0	74.7	18.0	120	86	0.85	2	80.9	2.6	45.8	84.4	18.1	95	100	0.91	0.09	19.7
Design 5	–109.5	–44	2	100.3	3.0	59.1	92.8	20.6	174	98	0.77	2	75.5	2.6	49.6	95.7	18.0	99	100	0.88	0.10	20.4
Design 6	–107	–40.5	1	108.3	3.5	55.6	72.7	20.6	210	84	0.79	2	91.3	3.0	46.7	76.5	18.7	128	100	0.85	0.07	17.7
Design 7	–64.5	–20.5	2	70.7	2.4	47.9	91.8	17.8	82	100	0.87	2	59.6	2.5	31.9	84.7	16.0	47	100	0.98	0.05	14.2
Design 8	–65.5	–17.5	2	85.6	3.0	50.2	72.4	19.2	131	100	0.84	2	85.4	3.5	43.7	60.4	18.1	131	100	0.89	0.04	14.8
Design 9	–63.5	–24.5	1	104.6	3.1	32.5	62.4	16.3	105	76	0.99	2	101.1	3.0	29.7	63.6	15.9	89	80	1.02	0.07	28.6
Design 10	–71.5	–21	1	79.9	3.8	46.3	55.6	18.9	141	93	0.91	3	69.5	3.0	29.9	60.5	16.9	63	100	1.06	0.07	30.5

The best results are highlighted in green and bold while the worst results are red and italic.