MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981336009 · doi:10.1118/1.3455287

Fast and memory‐efficient Monte Carlo‐based image reconstruction for whole‐body PET

2010· article· en· W1981336009 on OpenAlexaff
Long Zhang, Steven Staelens, Roel Van Holen, Jan De Beenhouwer, Jeroen Verhaeghe, I. Kawrakow, Stefaan Vandenberghe

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersUniversiteit Gent
KeywordsScannerMonte Carlo methodImage qualityComputer scienceIterative reconstructionMatrix (chemical analysis)AlgorithmPET-CTNoise (video)Computational scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligencePositron emission tomographyImage (mathematics)MathematicsNuclear medicineMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Several studies have shown the benefit of an accurate system modeling using Monte Carlo techniques. For state-of-the-art whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) scanners, Monte Carlo-based image reconstruction is associated with a significant computational cost to calculate the system matrix as well as a large memory capacity to store it. In this article, the authors present a simulation-reconstruction framework to solve these problems on the Philips Gemini GS PET scanner. METHODS: A fast, realistic system matrix simulation module was developed using egs_pet, which is an efficient PET simulation code based on EGSnrc. The generated system matrix was then used in a rotator-based ordered subset expectation maximization (OS-EM) algorithm, which exploits the rotational symmetry of a cylindrical PET scanner. The system matrix was further compressed by using sparse storage techniques. RESULTS: The system matrix simulation took five days on 50 cores of Xeon 2.66 GHz, resulting in a system matrix of 2.01 GB. The entire system matrix could be stored in the main memory of a standard personal computer. The image quality in terms of contrast-noise trade-offs was considerably improved compared to a standard OS-EM algorithm. The image quality was also compared to the clinical software on the scanner using routine parameter settings. The contrast recovery coefficient of small hot spheres and cold spheres was significantly improved. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that the proposed framework could be used for this PET scanner with improved image quality. This method could also be applied to other state-of-the-art whole-body PET scanners and preclinical PET scanners with a similar shape.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations44
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207