MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083682890 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/14/n189

Improved event positioning in a gamma ray detector using an iterative position-weighted centre-of-gravity algorithm

2013· article· en· W2083682890 on OpenAlexaff
Chenyi Liu, Andrew L. Goertzen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSilicon photomultiplierDetectorScintillatorAlgorithmOpticsScintillationPhysicsGaussianLyso-WeightingPosition (finance)Offset (computer science)Computer scienceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An iterative position-weighted centre-of-gravity algorithm was developed and tested for positioning events in a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM)-based scintillation detector for positron emission tomography. The algorithm used a Gaussian-based weighting function centred at the current estimate of the event location. The algorithm was applied to the signals from a 4 × 4 array of SiPM detectors that used individual channel readout and a LYSO:Ce scintillator array. Three scintillator array configurations were tested: single layer with 3.17 mm crystal pitch, matched to the SiPM size; single layer with 1.5 mm crystal pitch; and dual layer with 1.67 mm crystal pitch and a ½ crystal offset in the X and Y directions between the two layers. The flood histograms generated by this algorithm were shown to be superior to those generated by the standard centre of gravity. The width of the Gaussian weighting function of the algorithm was optimized for different scintillator array setups. The optimal width of the Gaussian curve was found to depend on the amount of light spread. The algorithm required less than 20 iterations to calculate the position of an event. The rapid convergence of this algorithm will readily allow for implementation on a front-end detector processing field programmable gate array for use in improved real-time event positioning and identification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207