MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2008927571 · doi:10.1117/12.479999

Image quality of direct conversion detectors for mammography and radiography: a theoretical comparison

2003· article· en· W2008927571 on OpenAlexaff
James G. Mainprize, Martin J. Yaffe

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetective quantum efficiencyDetectorOpticsPhysicsX-ray detectorImage qualityMaterials scienceComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct conversion detectors have the potential to provide very high resolution and high detective quantum efficiency (DQE). Selection of a material that is appropriate for the task is dictated by the material properties. A linear cascaded systems analysis of DQE is used to predict the performance of several detector materials such as amorphous Se, CdZnTe, and PbI2. A model is used to predict the spatial frequency-dependent DQE(f) for each material. This model includes: (1) x-ray absorption, (2) K fluorescence, (3) conversion gain, and (4) incomplete charge collection. A depth-dependent approach is used to account for gain variations and charge transport characteristics that change throughout the detector. In the model a parallel cascade, and non-elementary stages are used to model the effect of K-fluorescence reabsorption followed by incomplete charge collection. The DQE(f) is determined across an x-ray energy range of 10 to 100 keV for each material under typical bias conditions ranging from 0.1 V/μm to 10 V/μm. K-fluorescence escape and reabsorption blurring can cause marked reductions in the DQE(f). It is further reduced by incomplete charge collection which can theoretically decrease the DQE(f) by as much as 50% in extreme situations. This model will help determine key factors that will influence material selection for direct conversion x-ray systems.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging→French-language works237,207→