MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552473270 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2005.1596913

The Architecture of LabTEP, a Small Animal APD-Based Digital PET Scanner

2006· article· en· W1552473270 on OpenAlexaff
Réjean Fontaine, François Bélanger, Nicolas Viscogliosi, Hicham Semmaoui, Marc‐André Tétrault, J.-B. Michaud, C. Pépin, J. Cadorette, Roger Lecomte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersXilinx
KeywordsScannerComputer scienceArchitectureArtificial intelligenceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The highly multiplexed, integrated analog processing front-end of current PET scanners yields high accuracy for timing and crystal identification, but also adds significant dead time and offers little flexibility for improvement. A new fully digital APD-based scanner architecture is proposed wherein nuclear pulses are sampled directly at the output of the charge sensitive preamplifier with one free-running ADC per channel. This approach offers the opportunity to explore new digital signal processing algorithms borrowed to command and control theory, as well as advanced heuristics such as neural networks. The analog front-end consists of a dedicated 0.18-mum, 16-channel CMOS charge sensitive preamplifier. Digitization is performed with off-the-shelf dual 8-bit 45-MHz analog-to-digital converters. Digital processing is concentrated in a dual processor FPGA and a digital signal processor (DSP), which can process the data from up to 64 parallel channels with no dead time. The FPGA deals with the initial signal analysis for energy measurement and time stamping, while crystal identification is deferred to the DSP running computation-intensive auto-regressive algorithms. The entire system is controlled serially through a Firewire link by a graphic user interface. The initial LabPETtrade implementation of the system is a dedicated small animal scanner holding up to 3072 APD channels at an averaged count rate of up to 10 000 events/s each

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207