MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015957491 · doi:10.1117/12.595956

One-dimensional scatter grid for the SenoScan slot-scanning digital mammography system

2005· article· en· W2015957491 on OpenAlexaff
Idris A. Elbakri, Sam Z. Shen, Aili K. Bloomquist, Mike M. Tesic, Gordon E. Mawdsley, Martin J. Yaffe

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorCollimated lightMammographyDigital mammographyOpticsImaging phantomScannerReduction (mathematics)GridComputer scienceDynamic rangeImage qualityPhysicsComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SenoScan full-field digital mammography scanner uses a scanning slot detector that is 10 mm wide and 220 mm long. The X-ray beam is collimated to just outside the area of the detector. One important advantage of slot scanning is its inherent scatter rejection. As previously reported, the SenoScan slot scatter rejection is better than that obtained using a 3.5:1 mammography grid, and somewhat worse than that with a 5:1 grid. Additional scatter reduction can potentially improve the contrast in images of thick breasts. We evaluate a custom-designed grid for the slot scanning system. The grid is one-dimensional, offering scatter rejection along the longitudinal axis of the detector. We evaluate the reduction in scatter fraction, grid absorption and changes in the signal-difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR). Based on phantom studies, our results show effective scatter reduction by the grid with minimal reduction of SDNR. Grid absorption and scatter elimination do not necessarily lead to an increase in patient dose, especially if there is a improvement in the number of digital values in the image that are within the useful dynamic range of the detector. A benefit of removing the scatter contribution is an improvement in system dynamic range, because electronic detector gain adjustments can compensate for the drop in the digital pixel 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207