MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036916465 · doi:10.1118/1.4705354

Beyond noise power in 3D computed tomography: The local NPS and off‐diagonal elements of the Fourier domain covariance matrix

2012· article· en· W2036916465 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Angel R. Pineda, Daniel J. Tward, Antonio J. González, Jeffrey H. Siewerdsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteUniversity of California, DavisNational Institutes of HealthUniversity Health NetworkJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsImaging phantomCone beam computed tomographyPhysicsNoise (video)OpticsCylinderDiagonalFilter (signal processing)Computational physicsMathematicsGeometryComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the correlation and stationarity of noise in volumetric computed tomography (CT) using the local discrete noise-power spectrum (NPS) and off-diagonal elements of the covariance matrix of the discrete Fourier transform of noise-only images (denoted Σ(DFT)). Experimental conditions were varied to affect noise correlation and stationarity, the effects were quantified in terms of the NPS and Σ(DFT), and practical considerations in CT performance characterization were identified. METHODS: Cone-beam CT (CBCT) images were acquired using a benchtop system comprising an x-ray tube and flat-panel detector for a range of acquisition techniques (e.g., dose and x-ray scatter) and three phantom configurations hypothesized to impart distinct effects on the NPS and Σ(DFT): (A) air, (B) a 20-cm-diameter water cylinder with a bowtie filter, and (C) the cylinder without a bowtie filter. The NPS and off-diagonal elements of the Σ(DFT) were analyzed as a function of position within the reconstructions. RESULTS: The local NPS varied systematically throughout the axial plane in a manner consistent with changes in fluence transmitted to the detector and view sampling effects. Variability in fluence was manifest in the NPS magnitude-e.g., a factor of ~2 variation in NPS magnitude within the axial plane for case C (cylinder without bowtie), compared to nearly constant NPS magnitude for case B (bowtie filter matched to the cylinder). View sampling effects were most prominent in case A (air) where the variance increased at greater distance from the center of reconstruction and in case C (cylinder) where the NPS exhibited correlations in the radial direction. The effects of detector lag were observed as azimuthal correlation. The cylinder (without bowtie) had the strongest nonstationarity because of the larger variability in fluence transmitted to the detector. The diagonal elements of the Σ(DFT) were equivalent to the NPS estimated from the periodogram, and the average off-diagonal elements of the Σ(DFT) exhibited amplitude of ~1% of the NPS for the experimental conditions investigated. Furthermore, the off-diagonal elements demonstrated fairly long tails of nearly constant amplitude, with magnitude somewhat reduced for experimental conditions associated with greater stationarity (viz., lower Σ(DFT) tails for cases A and B in comparison to case C). CONCLUSIONS: Volumetric CT exhibits nonstationarity in the NPS as hypothesized in relation to fluence uniformity and view sampling. Measurement of the NPS should seek to minimize such changes in noise correlations and include careful reporting of experimental conditions (e.g., phantom design and use of a bowtie filter) and spatial dependence (e.g., analysis at fixed radius within a phantom). Off-diagonal elements of the Σ(DFT) similarly depend on experimental conditions and can be readily computed from the same data as the NPS. This work begins to check assumptions in NPS analysis examine the extent to which NPS is an appropriate descriptor of noise correlations, and investigate the magnitude of off-diagonal elements of the Σ(DFT). While the magnitude of such off-diagonal elements appears to be low, their cumulative effect on space-variant detectability remains to be investigated-e.g., using task-specific figures of merit.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.291
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations40
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207