MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062283617 · doi:10.1118/1.3182672

TH-D-BRC-01: Improvement of Megavoltage Cone-Beam CT Image Quality Using a Low-Atomic Number X-Ray Target

2009· article· en· W2062283617 on OpenAlexaff
James L. Robar, R Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomNuclear medicineLinear particle acceleratorIonization chamberCollimatorContrast-to-noise ratioCone beam computed tomographyOpticsMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Laser beam qualityPhysicsImage qualityMedicineIonizationComputed tomographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: to investigate the application of an unflattened photon beam, generated using a low atomic number (Z) x-ray target, to MV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging. Improvements of image contrast and contrast-to-noise-ratio (CNR) versus dose are quantified and compared to the standard 6MV beam. Limitation of the contrast advantage with patient separation is examined. Method and Materials: The experimental beam was generated by a 2100EX linac (Varian Medical, Inc) by placing a 1.0 cm-thick Al target 9 mm below the primary collimator vacuum window and operating the linac in 6 MeV electron mode. The flattening filtration was removed. Projections were acquired using an AS1000 detector every 2° through 360°. CBCT contrast was compared for both the low-Z-target and 6MV beams. CNR was measured as a function of dose using a bone/lung phantom containing a central ionization chamber. The same phantom was located in cylindrical containers ranging in diameter from 13 cm to 25 cm to measure the rate of reduction of CBCT contrast with separation. Finally, a pig head was imaged allowing a qualitative comparison. Results: Contrast is improved by a factor ranging from 1.8 to 3.4 (mean 2.3) with the low-Z-target beam. Over an imaging dose range from 3 cGy to 23.5 cGy, CNR improves by a consistent factor of 1.7 and 2.4 for bone and lung, respectively. Contrast deteriorates with separation more rapidly for the low-Z-target beam than for 6MV; however for the maximum diameter of 25 cm contrast remains superior by a factor of 1.4 and 1.5 for bone and lung, respectively. Images of the pig head demonstrate qualitatively improved CNR and preservation of spatial resolution. Conclusion: Contrast and CNR are improved significantly in CBCT images using the low-Z-target beam, over a clinically-useful range of patient separation. Conflict of interest: Research sponsored by Varian Medical, Incorporated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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