MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005248683 · doi:10.1118/1.2828186

Dual-energy imaging of the chest: Optimization of image acquisition techniques for the ‘bone-only’ image

2008· article· en· W2005248683 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Shkumat, J. H. Siewerdsen, Samuel Richard, Narinder Paul, J. Yorkston, Richard Van Metter

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical imagingImage processingImage (mathematics)Dual energyComputer scienceImage qualityEnergy (signal processing)Computer visionMedical physicsRadiologyArtificial intelligenceNuclear medicineMedicinePhysicsOsteoporosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments were conducted to determine optimal acquisition techniques for bone image decompositions for a prototype dual-energy (DE) imaging system. Technique parameters included kVp pair (denoted [kVp(L)/kVp(H)]) and dose allocation (the proportion of dose in low- and high-energy projections), each optimized to provide maximum signal difference-to-noise ratio in DE images. Experiments involved a chest phantom representing an average patient size and containing simulated ribs and lung nodules. Low- and high-energy kVp were varied from 60-90 and 120-150 kVp, respectively. The optimal kVp pair was determined to be [60/130] kVp, with image quality showing a strong dependence on low-kVp selection. Optimal dose allocation was approximately 0.5-i.e., an equal dose imparted by the low- and high-energy projections. The results complement earlier studies of optimal DE soft-tissue image acquisition, with differences attributed to the specific imaging task. Together, the results help to guide the development and implementation of high-performance DE imaging systems, with applications including lung nodule detection and diagnosis, pneumothorax identification, and musculoskeletal imaging (e.g., discrimination of rib fractures from metastasis).

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207