Rigid-body transformation of list-mode projection data for respiratory motion correction in cardiac PET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution cardiac PET imaging with emphasis on quantification would benefit from eliminating the problem of respiratory movement during data acquisition. Respiratory gating on the basis of list-mode data has been employed previously as one approach to reduce motion effects. However, it results in poor count statistics with degradation of image quality. This work reports on the implementation of a technique to correct for respiratory motion in the area of the heart at no extra cost for count statistics and with the potential to maintain ECG gating, based on rigid-body transformations on list-mode data event-by-event. A motion-corrected data set is obtained by assigning, after pre-correction for detector efficiency and photon attenuation, individual lines-of-response to new detector pairs with consideration of respiratory motion. Parameters of respiratory motion are obtained from a series of gated image sets by means of image registration. Respiration is recorded simultaneously with the list-mode data using an inductive respiration monitor with an elasticized belt at chest level. The accuracy of the technique was assessed with point-source data showing a good correlation between measured and true transformations. The technique was applied on phantom data with simulated respiratory motion, showing successful recovery of tracer distribution and contrast on the motion-corrected images, and on patient data with C15O and 18FDG. Quantitative assessment of preliminary C15O patient data showed improvement in the recovery coefficient at the centre of the left ventricle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".