A scatter-corrected list-mode reconstruction and a practical scatter/random approximation technique for dynamic PET imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe an ordinary Poisson list-mode expectation maximization (OP-LMEM) algorithm with a sinogram-based scatter correction method based on the single scatter simulation (SSS) technique and a random correction method based on the variance-reduced delayed-coincidence technique. We also describe a practical approximate scatter and random-estimation approach for dynamic PET studies based on a time-averaged scatter and random estimate followed by scaling according to the global numbers of true coincidences and randoms for each temporal frame. The quantitative accuracy achieved using OP-LMEM was compared to that obtained using the histogram-mode 3D ordinary Poisson ordered subset expectation maximization (3D-OP) algorithm with similar scatter and random correction methods, and they showed excellent agreement. The accuracy of the approximated scatter and random estimates was tested by comparing time activity curves (TACs) as well as the spatial scatter distribution from dynamic non-human primate studies obtained from the conventional (frame-based) approach and those obtained from the approximate approach. An excellent agreement was found, and the time required for the calculation of scatter and random estimates in the dynamic studies became much less dependent on the number of frames (we achieved a nearly four times faster performance on the scatter and random estimates by applying the proposed method). The precision of the scatter fraction was also demonstrated for the conventional and the approximate approach using phantom studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".