MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075328626 · doi:10.1118/1.1999107

Automatic exposure control for a slot scanning full field digital mammography system

2005· article· en· W2075328626 on OpenAlexaff
Idris A. Elbakri, A. V. Lakshminarayanan, Mike M. Tesic

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMammographyDigital mammographyImaging phantomComputer scienceAutomatic exposure controlWorkflowHistogramFeature (linguistics)Digital radiographyComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOpticsImage (mathematics)Breast cancerPhysicsRadiologyMedicineRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic exposure control (AEC) is an important feature in mammography. It enables consistently optimal image exposure despite variations in tissue density and thickness, and user skill level. Full field digital mammography systems cannot employ conventional AEC methods because digital receptors fully absorb the x-ray beam. In this paper we describe an AEC procedure for slot scanning mammography. With slot scanning detectors, our approach uses a fast low-resolution and low-exposure prescan to acquire an image of the breast. Tube potential depends on breast thickness, and the prescan histogram provides the necessary information to calculate the required tube current. We validate our approach with simulated prescan images and phantom measurements. We achieve accurate exposure tracking with thickness and density, and expect this method of AEC to reduce retakes and improve workflow.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207