MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117155488 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.1996.587918

Evaluation of the ICS and DEW scatter correction methods for low statistical content scans in 3D PET

2002· article· en· W2117155488 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

Venue1996 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)Imaging phantomDetectorStatistical noiseContrast (vision)Figure of meritComputer scienceImage contrastConvolution (computer science)Artificial intelligenceOpticsMathematicsPhysicsComputer visionStatisticsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of the Integral Convolution and the Dual Energy Window scatter correction methods in 3D PET has been evaluated over a wide range of statistical content of acquired data (1 M to 400 M events). The order in which scatter correction and detector normalization should be applied has also been investigated. Phantom and human neuroreceptor studies were used with the following figures of merit: axial and radial uniformity, sinogram and image noise, contrast accuracy and contrast accuracy uniformity. Both scatter correction methods perform reliably in the range of number of events examined. Normalization applied after scatter correction yields better radial uniformity and fewer image artefacts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.277 · 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