. . "1"^^ . . . "P(GAP102/11/0318), P(ME10123), Z(AV0Z20650511), Z(MSM0021630513)" . "PIERS Online" . "[7F80F3FB00B5]" . . "205486" . . "3"^^ . "RIV/68081731:_____/11:00367355!RIV12-AV0-68081731" . . . . . "Interpolation of 3D Magnetic Resonance Data" . "NMR; 3D reconstruction"@en . . "Gescheidtov\u00E1, E." . . "Interpolation of 3D Magnetic Resonance Data" . "RIV/68081731:_____/11:00367355" . "Interpolation of 3D Magnetic Resonance Data"@en . "Mikulka, J." . . . . "Interpolation of 3D Magnetic Resonance Data"@en . "This article deals with three-dimensional reconstruction methods of nuclear magnetic resonance images. The testing images were observed by tomography with basic magnetic field of 4.7T at the Institute of Scientific Instruments (Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic). The 20 slices of the test phantom were acquired. Two methods were found with the aim of getting utmost information about the shape of the testing phantom. One possible way is to increase the count of the sensed slices, but it implies decreasing of the signal to noise ratio. The second approach is finding the compromise between the efective count of slices and the following interpolation of other slices between the sensed ones. The both approaches were compared. Only 10 slices were used to compute the in-between others. It is better to use this approach because the computed slices can be compared with the real slices obtained by MR tomography." . "1931-7360" . . "1" . . "7" . . "4"^^ . . "Bartu\u0161ek, Karel" . "US - Spojen\u00E9 st\u00E1ty americk\u00E9" . "This article deals with three-dimensional reconstruction methods of nuclear magnetic resonance images. The testing images were observed by tomography with basic magnetic field of 4.7T at the Institute of Scientific Instruments (Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic). The 20 slices of the test phantom were acquired. Two methods were found with the aim of getting utmost information about the shape of the testing phantom. One possible way is to increase the count of the sensed slices, but it implies decreasing of the signal to noise ratio. The second approach is finding the compromise between the efective count of slices and the following interpolation of other slices between the sensed ones. The both approaches were compared. Only 10 slices were used to compute the in-between others. It is better to use this approach because the computed slices can be compared with the real slices obtained by MR tomography."@en . "10.2529/PIERS100909043626" .