MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543995890 · doi:10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4417

Scanner and kVp dependence of measured CT numbers in the ACR CT phantom

2013· article· en· W1543995890 on OpenAlexaff
R. Cropp, Petar Seslija, David K. Tso, Yogesh Thakur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomScannerNuclear medicineHounsfield scaleAutomatic exposure controlImage qualityMaterials scienceMedicineComputed tomographyBiomedical engineeringRadiologyComputer sciencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quality control testing of CT scanners in our region includes a measurement of CT numbers in the American College of Radiology (ACR) CT phantom using a standardized protocol. CT number values are clinically relevant in determining the composition of various tissues in the body. Accuracy is important in the characterization of tumors, assessment of coronary calcium, and identification of urinary stone composition. Effective quality control requires that tolerance ranges of CT number values be defined: a measured value outside the range indicates the need for further investigation and possible recalibration of the scanner. This paper presents the results of CT number measurements on 36 scanners (25 GE, 10 Siemens and 1 Toshiba) at each available kVp. Among the five materials (solid water, air, polyethylene, acrylic, bone-equivalent) the measured CT numbers exhibit manufacturer and kVp dependence, which should be taken into account when defining tolerances. With this scan protocol, air and solid water values are significantly higher on GE scanners than on Siemens scanners (p-value < 0.01 at each kVp). The CT numbers of polyethylene and acrylic increase with kVp, while the bone-equivalent CT number decreases. These results are used to define manufacturer- and kVp-specific tolerance ranges for the CT numbers of each material in this phantom, which will be used in our quality control program.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations137
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207