{"id":"W2041138563","doi":"10.1007/s12350-009-9171-0","title":"An investigation of potential sources of artifacts in SPECT-CT myocardial perfusion studies","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Nuclear Cardiology","topic":"Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics","field":"Medicine","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Correction for attenuation; Imaging phantom; Attenuation; Medicine; Iterative reconstruction; Myocardial perfusion imaging; Perfusion; Nuclear medicine; Artifact (error); Perfusion scanning; Artificial intelligence; Pattern recognition (psychology); Radiology; Biomedical engineering; Computer science; Positron emission tomography; Physics; Optics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002357268,0.0005121385,0.000356962,0.001805779,0.0003689813,0.0008678152,0.0006178893,0.001189419,0.002317793],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01246189,0.0003820351,0.0004799565,0.001088643,0.0004711456,0.0007291669,0.0003502671,0.0005562807,0.00048769],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001989047,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003530762,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005252218,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005452363,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991809,0.0003727605,0.0001071157,0.00005163481,0.0002263679,0.00006129184],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9931254,0.004614029,0.0007051443,0.0004890339,0.0008899224,0.0001764026],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.01520883,0.0005120104,0.213226,0.001398169,0.00048534,0.09050509,0.001235057,0.002222332,0.5190887,0.002121156,0.0009395013,0.1530578],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003845601,0.005917081,0.2574754,0.0003335777,0.001460186,0.2216199,0.0008184068,0.02070114,0.4795379,0.001272348,0.01037699,0.0001025156],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9300346,0.00776615,0.05429392,0.0003483713,0.00005615512,0.0002349665,0.0002119988,0.0001853334,0.006868453],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9827216,0.001551023,0.01371656,0.0001948405,0.00007813673,0.00003961589,0.0001562115,0.0001090804,0.001433019],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.002357268,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.01246661,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01958648237943695,"score_gpt":0.2890204051134408,"score_spread":0.2694339227340039,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}