MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059241311 · doi:10.1117/12.535933

Penalty on the detective quantum efficiency from off-axis incident x rays

2004· article· en· W2059241311 on OpenAlexafffund
George Hajdok, Ian A. Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsQuantumPhysicsOpticsComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An often neglected assumption related to detector performance metrics such as the modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum (NPS), and detective quantum efficiency (DQE) is that they only apply to a small region around the centre of an x-ray image. In the periphery of an image, image formation is from obliquely incident x rays. These off-axis x rays will introduce an additional degrading effect on the above detector performance metrics. In our study, we use Monte Carlo simulations to quantify the effects of off-axis radiation on the MTF, NPS, and DQE on common diagnostic x-ray detectors. In our simulations, we vary the incident angle of x rays between 0° and 12°, which is a typical range of divergence in diagnostic x-ray imaging. In the case of amorphous selenium, our results show that off-axis incident x rays degrade the MTF above 5 cycles/mm with increasing severity at higher incident angles and x-ray energy, and more importantly has very little effect on the NPS. Hence, the impact is more severe on the DQE due to the MTF squared dependency. For an incident x-ray angle of 12° (~13 cm from central axis or chest wall in mammography), the DQE falls to 50% of its initial value at 10 and 7 cycles/mm for x-ray energies of 20 and 40 keV, respectively. This loss of signal-to-noise ratio may be most significant near the skin line in mammography studies.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2004
Admission routes2
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