MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075047016 · doi:10.1063/1.3213621

The design and application of an in-laboratory diffraction-enhanced x-ray imaging instrument

2009· article· en· W2075047016 on OpenAlexaff
Ivan Nesch, Daniel P. Fogarty, Tochko Tzvetkov, Benjamin Reinhart, A. Charles Walus, Gocha Khelashvili, Carol Muehleman, Dean Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonochromatorOpticsMicrobeamMonochromatic colorDiffractionImage resolutionMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the design and application of a new in-laboratory diffraction-enhanced x-ray imaging (DEXI) instrument that uses a nonsynchrotron, conventional x-ray source to image the internal structure of an object. In the work presented here, a human cadaveric thumb is used as a test-sample to demonstrate the imaging capability of our instrument. A 22 keV monochromatic x-ray beam is prepared using a mismatched, two-crystal monochromator; a silicon analyzer crystal is placed in a parallel crystal geometry with the monochromator allowing both diffraction-enhanced imaging and multiple-imaging radiography to be performed. The DEXI instrument was found to have an experimentally determined spatial resolution of 160+/-7 mum in the horizontal direction and 153+/-7 mum in the vertical direction. As applied to biomedical imaging, the DEXI instrument can detect soft tissues, such as tendons and other connective tissues, that are normally difficult or impossible to image via conventional x-ray techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations46
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207