MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100431868 · doi:10.1109/tns.2007.911883

Timing Improvement by Low-Pass Filtering and Linear Interpolation for the LabPET Scanner

2008· article· en· W2100431868 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpolation (computer graphics)ScannerTimestampLyso-Computer scienceFilter (signal processing)AlgorithmImage resolutionSampling (signal processing)Electronic engineeringComputer hardwarePhysicsReal-time computingComputer visionOpticsArtificial intelligenceDetectorEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital processing for positron emission tomography (PET) scanners commonly relies on low frequency sampling (MHz) to reduce power consumption. Timestamps must then be interpolated between samples to achieve adequate time resolution for coincidence detection of annihilation radiation. A low-pass filter based interpolation algorithm adding up to 31 samples between original samples was designed to improve timing resolution of the LabPET scanner. A 2-bit refinement in the determination of the pulse maximum amplitude leads to a better estimation of the triggering threshold, which in turn enables a more accurate timestamp generation. Timestamp accuracy was investigated as a function of trigger level (15%-50% of maximum value). With the trigger threshold set at 20%, coincidence time resolution of ns for LYSO-LYSO and ns for LGSO-LGSO are obtained. A real time implementation of the algorithm was achieved in a Xilinx FPGA.

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.

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 score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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