MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060193743 · doi:10.1118/1.2358324

Characterization of scattered radiation in kV CBCT images using Monte Carlo simulations

2006· article· en· W2060193743 on OpenAlexaff
G Jarry, D Moseley, Jeffrey H. Siewerdsen, Frank Verhaegen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodCharacterization (materials science)Radiation transportMedical physicsDosimetryMedical imagingRadiationRadiation dosePhysicsOpticsStatistical physicsNuclear medicineComputer scienceMedicineMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kilovoltage (kV) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images suffer from a substantial scatter contribution. In this study, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are used to evaluate the scattered radiation present in projection images. These predicted scatter distributions are also used as a scatter correction technique. Images were acquired using a kV CBCT bench top system. The EGSnrc MC code was used to model the flat panel imager, the phantoms, and the x-ray source. The x-ray source model was validated using first and second half-value layers (HVL) and profile measurements. The HVLs and the profile were found to agree within 3% and 6%, respectively. MC simulated and measured projection images for a cylindrical water phantom and for an anthropomorphic head phantom agreed within 8% and 10%. A modified version of the DOSXYZnrc MC code was used to score phase space files with identified scattered and primary particles behind the phantoms. The cone angle, the source-to-detector distance, the phantom geometry, and the energy were varied to determine their effect on the scattered radiation distribution. A scatter correction technique was developed in which the MC predicted scatter distribution is subtracted from the projections prior to reconstruction. Preliminary testing of the procedure was done with an anthropomorphic head phantom and a contrast phantom. Contrast and profile measurements were obtained for the scatter corrected and noncorrected images. An improvement of 3% for contrast between solid water and a liver insert and 11% between solid water and a Teflon insert were obtained and a significant reduction in cupping and streaking artifacts was observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations187
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207