MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092342629 · doi:10.1117/12.710147

Amplified pixel sensor architectures for low dose computed tomography using silicon thin film technology

2007· article· en· W2092342629 on OpenAlexaff
Farhad Taghibakhsh, K. S. Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelFrame rateImage resolutionDetectorLinearityCone beam computed tomographyImage sensorComputer scienceFlat panel detectorOpticsDot pitchNoise (video)Frame (networking)Dynamic rangeComputed tomographyArtificial intelligencePhysicsComputer visionTelecommunicationsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been recently reported using flat panel imagers (FPI). Here, detector technology capable of high speed imaging, high spatial resolution, large volume coverage, better contrast resolution and, in particular, lowered patient dose is required. Employing active matrix flat panel imagers (AMFPIs) as cone beam CT detectors has been proposed as a solution for improving volume coverage, contrast and resolution; however, clinical evaluations have shown that they suffer from low speed read out. Unlike passive pixel architecture which is currently the state-of-the-art technology for AMFPIs, our preliminary studies have shown that novel amplified pixel sensor (APS) architectures can overcome the low readout speed, and moreover, they provide gain which can be traded for higher frame rate and lower X-ray doses. Although APS architectures can meet the high dynamic range and low noise requirements of CT imaging, linearity and variations between pixel characteristics are major issues. In this study we will investigate novel APS architectures to address these concerns.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207