<title>Progress in multiple-image radiography</title>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional mammography is one of the most widely used diagnostic imaging techniques, but it has serious and well-known shortcomings, which are driving the development of innovative alternatives. Our group has been developing an x-ray imaging approach called multiple-image radiography (MIR), which shows promise as a potential alternative to conventional x-ray imaging (radiography). Like computed tomography (CT), MIR is a computed imaging technique, in which the images are not directly observed, but rather computed algorithmically. Whereas conventional radiography produces just one image depicting absorption effects, MIR simultaneously produces three images, showing separately the effects of absorption, refraction, and ultra-small-angle x-ray scattering. The latter two effects are caused by refractive-index variations in the object, which yield fine image details not seen in standard radiographs. MIR has the added benefits of dramatically lessening radiation dose, virtually eliminating scatter degradation, and lessening the importance of compressing the breast during imaging. In this paper we review progress to date on the MIR technique, focus on the basic physics and signal-processing issues involved in this new imaging method.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".