MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965828060 · doi:10.1118/1.1799291

The impact of tumor motion upon CT image integrity and target delineation

2004· article· en· W1965828060 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Gagne, Don Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolume renderingImaging phantomComputer visionComputer scienceConformal mapArtificial intelligenceImage qualityRendering (computer graphics)Iterative reconstructionRadiation therapyPartial volumeMotion (physics)Nuclear medicineMathematicsImage (mathematics)RadiologyMedicineGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate planning target volume delineation is vital to the success of conformal radiation techniques such as standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy. With the exception of breath-hold schemes, all current approaches acquire images while the tumor is nonstationary and, as such, are subject to the presence of motion artifacts. In lung cancer sites where tumor mobility can be significant, the detrimental effect of these motion-induced distortions on image quality and subsequently target volume delineation cannot be ignored in the pursuit of improved treatment outcomes. To investigate the fundamental nature and functional dependence of computed tomography (CT) artifacts associated with lung tumor motion, and the implications for tumor delineation, a filtered backprojection algorithm was developed in MATLAB to generate transverse CT simulation images. In addition, a three-dimensional phantom capable of mimicking the essential motions of lung tumors was constructed for experimental verification. Results show that the spatial extent of a mobile object is distorted from its true shape and location and does not accurately reflect the volume occupied during the extent of motion captured. The presence of motion also negatively impacts image intensity (density) integrity rendering accurate volume delineation highly problematic and calling into question the use of such data in CT-based heterogeneity correction algorithms for dosimetric calculation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations40
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207