Performance evaluation of the 16-module quad-HIDAC small animal PET camera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quad-HIDAC small animal PET camera is a quadratic array of high-density avalanche chambers; the camera described in this publication consists of 16 modules. We present the system response using point and line sources and a mouse phantom. The quad-HIDAC camera exhibits a count rate stability of better than 1% and linearity of response to coincidences up to 2.2 x 10(5) cps at 16 MBq activity. Corrected for deadtime and random coincidences, the efficiency for the line source is 0.011, of which unscattered coincidences yield 0.009. The scatter fraction originating from the detectors is 0.22. Absorption within the mouse phantom was 20% and the scatter fraction increased to 0.29. Resolution is uniform within the entire field-of-view, which is 28 cm axially and 17 cm radially. Reconstruction of a point source yields a resolution of 1.1 mm FWHM for all three components. The performance of the camera demonstrates its excellent suitability for the functional imaging of small animals.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".