Examines robustness in magnetic-field homogeneity under uncertainties, indicating significant discrepancies.
This paper revisits Problem A of the TEAM 35 benchmark from the viewpoint of robustness estimation under manufacturing uncertainty. Rather than treating the original extremal-position-based sensitivity metric as the formulation to be improved, it is used only as a baseline for comparison with other metrics. In this work, robustness is evaluated as the largest degradation of the nominal magnetic-field homogeneity objective observed over prescribed sets of admissible manufacturing perturbations. In addition to turn-position uncertainties, the present study also includes uncertainty in the excitation current density. While turn-position errors affect each turn individually, current-density uncertainty affects the error contributions of all turns simultaneously through a common term. This common-mode excitation uncertainty represents an extension of the original benchmark formulation and is one of the paper’s main focal points. Several Design of Experiments (DoE) methodologies, as well as search-based robustness estimation strategies, are compared in terms of error in estimated robustness and computational demand. The results show that the original extremal-position-based approximation can substantially underestimate the sampled robustness of the nominal field-homogeneity objective. Including current-density uncertainty further increases the discrepancy between the original metric and the sampled robustness estimates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tamás Orosz (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: