Isotope specific resolution recovery image reconstruction in high resolution PET imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Measuring and incorporating a scanner-specific point spread function (PSF) within image reconstruction has been shown to improve spatial resolution in PET. However, due to the short half-life of clinically used isotopes, other long-lived isotopes not used in clinical practice are used to perform the PSF measurements. As such, non-optimal PSF models that do not correspond to those needed for the data to be reconstructed are used within resolution modeling (RM) image reconstruction, usually underestimating the true PSF owing to the difference in positron range. In high resolution brain and preclinical imaging, this effect is of particular importance since the PSFs become more positron range limited and isotope-specific PSFs can help maximize the performance benefit from using resolution recovery image reconstruction algorithms. METHODS: In this work, the authors used a printing technique to simultaneously measure multiple point sources on the High Resolution Research Tomograph (HRRT), and the authors demonstrated the feasibility of deriving isotope-dependent system matrices from fluorine-18 and carbon-11 point sources. Furthermore, the authors evaluated the impact of incorporating them within RM image reconstruction, using carbon-11 phantom and clinical datasets on the HRRT. RESULTS: The results obtained using these two isotopes illustrate that even small differences in positron range can result in different PSF maps, leading to further improvements in contrast recovery when used in image reconstruction. The difference is more pronounced in the centre of the field-of-view where the full width at half maximum (FWHM) from the positron range has a larger contribution to the overall FWHM compared to the edge where the parallax error dominates the overall FWHM. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the proposed methodology, measured isotope-specific and spatially variant PSFs can be reliably derived and used for improved spatial resolution and variance performance in resolution recovery image reconstruction. The benefits are expected to be more substantial for more energetic positron emitting isotopes such as Oxygen-15 and Rubidium-82.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".