A stoichiometric calibration method for dual energy computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The accuracy of radiotherapy dose calculation relies crucially on patient composition data. The computed tomography (CT) calibration methods based on the stoichiometric calibration of Schneider et al (1996 Phys. Med. Biol. 41 111-24) are the most reliable to determine electron density (ED) with commercial single energy CT scanners. Along with the recent developments in dual energy CT (DECT) commercial scanners, several methods were published to determine ED and the effective atomic number (EAN) for polyenergetic beams without the need for CT calibration curves. This paper intends to show that with a rigorous definition of the EAN, the stoichiometric calibration method can be successfully adapted to DECT with significant accuracy improvements with respect to the literature without the need for spectrum measurements or empirical beam hardening corrections. Using a theoretical framework of ICRP human tissue compositions and the XCOM photon cross sections database, the revised stoichiometric calibration method yields Hounsfield unit (HU) predictions within less than ±1.3 HU of the theoretical HU calculated from XCOM data averaged over the spectra used (e.g., 80 kVp, 100 kVp, 140 kVp and 140/Sn kVp). A fit of mean excitation energy (I-value) data as a function of EAN is provided in order to determine the ion stopping power of human tissues from ED-EAN measurements. Analysis of the calibration phantom measurements with the Siemens SOMATOM Definition Flash dual source CT scanner shows that the present formalism yields mean absolute errors of (0.3 ± 0.4)% and (1.6 ± 2.0)% on ED and EAN, respectively. For ion therapy, the mean absolute errors for calibrated I-values and proton stopping powers (216 MeV) are (4.1 ± 2.7)% and (0.5 ± 0.4)%, respectively. In all clinical situations studied, the uncertainties in ion ranges in water for therapeutic energies are found to be less than 1.3 mm, 0.7 mm and 0.5 mm for protons, helium and carbon ions respectively, using a generic reconstruction algorithm (filtered back projection). With a more advanced method (sinogram affirmed iterative technique), the values become 1.0 mm, 0.5 mm and 0.4 mm for protons, helium and carbon ions, respectively. These results allow one to conclude that the present adaptation of the stoichiometric calibration yields a highly accurate method for characterizing tissue with DECT for ion beam therapy and potentially for photon beam therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".