MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005652542 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/3/004

Analytically derived weighting factors for transmission tomography cone beam projections

2009· article· en· W2005652542 on OpenAlexaff
Weiguang Yao, Konrad Leszczyński

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaLaurentian UniversitySudbury Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeightingProjection (relational algebra)VoxelA-weightingTransmission (telecommunications)Beam (structure)Cone (formal languages)DetectorMathematicsIterative reconstructionTomographyCone beam computed tomographyAlgorithmOpticsComputer scienceGeometryArtificial intelligencePhysicsComputed tomographyTelecommunicationsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Weighting factors, which define the contributions of individual voxels of a 3D object to individual projection elements (pixels) on the detector, are the basic elements required in iterative tomographic reconstructions from transmission projections. Exact or as accurate as possible values for weighting factors are required in high-resolution reconstructions. Geometric complexity of the problem, however, makes it difficult to obtain exact weighting factor values. In this work, we derive an analytical expression for the weighting factors in cone beam projection geometry. The resulting formula is validated and applied to reconstruction from mega and kilovoltage x-ray cone beam projections. The reconstruction speed and accuracy are significantly improved by using the weighting factor values.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207