MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106448419 · doi:10.1109/tns.2012.2186589

The Effect of Photon Statistics and Pulse Shaping on the Performance of the Wiener Filter Crystal Identification Algorithm Applied to LabPET Phoswich Detectors

2012· article· en· W2106448419 on OpenAlexaff
Hoorvash Camilia Yousefzadeh, Roger Lecomte, Réjean Fontaine

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvalanche photodiodeNoise (video)DetectorPhysicsData acquisitionAlgorithmScintillationFilter (signal processing)OpticsElectronic engineeringWiener filterPulse shapingComputer scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer visionLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fast Wiener filter-based crystal identification (WFCI) algorithm was recently developed to discriminate crystals with close scintillation decay times in phoswich detectors. Despite the promising performance of WFCI, the influence of various physical factors and electrical noise sources of the data acquisition chain (DAQ) on the crystal identification process was not fully investigated. This paper examines the effect of different noise sources, such as photon statistics, avalanche photodiode (APD) excess multiplication noise, and front-end electronic noise, as well as the influence of different shaping filters on the performance of the WFCI algorithm. To this end, a PET-like signal simulator based on a model of the LabPET DAQ, a small animal APD-based digital PET scanner, was developed. Simulated signals were generated under various noise conditions with CR-RC shapers of order 1, 3, and 5 having different time constants (τ). Applying the WFCI algorithm to these simulated signals showed that the non-stationary Poisson photon statistics is the main contributor to the identification error of WFCI algorithm. A shaping filter of order 1 with τ = 50 ns yielded the best WFCI performance (error ~1%), while a longer shaping time of τ = 100 ns slightly degraded the WFCI performance (error ~3%). Filters of higher orders with fast shaping time constants (10-33 ns) also produced good WFCI results (error 1.4% to 1.6%). This study shows the advantage of the pulse simulator in evaluating various DAQ conditions and confirms the influence of the detection chain on the WFCI performance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207