Spatial resolution recovery utilizing multi-ray tracing and graphic processing unit in PET image reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depth-of-interaction (DOI) poses a major challenge for a PET system to achieve uniform spatial resolution across the field-of-view, particularly for small animal and organ-dedicated PET systems. In this work, we implemented an analytical method to model system matrix for resolution recovery, which was then incorporated in PET image reconstruction on a graphical processing unit platform, due to its parallel processing capacity. The method utilizes the concepts of virtual DOI layers and multi-ray tracing to calculate the coincidence detection response function for a given line-of-response. The accuracy of the proposed method was validated for a small-bore PET insert to be used for simultaneous PET/MR breast imaging. In addition, the performance comparisons were studied among the following three cases: 1) no physical DOI and no resolution modeling; 2) two physical DOI layers and no resolution modeling; and 3) no physical DOI design but with a different number of virtual DOI layers. The image quality was quantitatively evaluated in terms of spatial resolution (full-width-half-maximum and position offset), contrast recovery coefficient and noise. The results indicate that the proposed method has the potential to be used as an alternative to other physical DOI designs and achieve comparable imaging performances, while reducing detector/system design cost and complexity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".