The x‐ray time of flight method for investigation of ghosting in amorphous selenium‐based flat panel medical x‐ray imagers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amorphous selenium (a-Se) based real-time flat-panel imagers (FPIs) are finding their way into the digital radiology department because they offer the practical advantages of digital x-ray imaging combined with an image quality that equals or outperforms that of conventional systems. The temporal imaging characteristics of FPIs can be affected by ghosting (i.e., radiation-induced changes of sensitivity) when the dose to the detector is high (e.g., portal imaging and mammography) or the images are acquired at a high frame rate (e.g., fluoroscopy). In this paper, the x-ray time-of-flight (TOF) method is introduced as a tool for the investigation of ghosting in a-Se photoconductor layers. The method consists of irradiating layers of a-Se with short x-ray pulses. From the current generated in the a-Se layer, ghosting is quantified and the ghosting parameters (charge carrier generation rate and carrier lifetimes and mobilities) are assessed. The x-ray TOF method is novel in that (1) x-ray sensitivity (S) and ghosting parameters can be measured simultaneously, (2) the transport of both holes and electrons can be isolated, and (3) the method is applicable to the practical a-Se layer structure with blocking contacts used in FPIs. The x-ray TOF method was applied to an analysis of ghosting in a-Se photoconductor layers under portal imaging conditions, i.e., 1 mm thick a-Se layers, biased at 5 V/ microm, were irradiated using a 6 MV LINAC x-ray beam to a total dose (ghosting dose) of 30 Gy. The initial sensitivity (S0) of the a-Se layers was 63 +/- 2 nC cm(-2) cGy(-1). It was found that S decreases to 30% of S0 after a ghosting dose of 5 Gy and to 21% after 30 Gy at which point no further change in S occurs. At an x-ray intensity of 22 Gy/s (instantaneous dose rate during a LINAC x-ray pulse), the charge carrier generation rate was 1.25 +/- 0.1 x 10(22) ehp m(-3) s(-1) and, to a first approximation, independent of the ghosting dose. However, both hole and electron transport showed a strong dependence on the ghosting dose: hole transport decreased by 61%, electron transport by up to approximately 80%. Therefore, degradation of both hole and electron transport due to the recombination of mobile charge carriers with trapped carriers (of opposite polarity) were identified as the main cause of ghosting in this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".