MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126750265 · doi:10.1109/tns.2003.817388

Application of reconstruction techniques to correctly identify the myocardium in the presence of overlying organs

2003· article· en· W2126750265 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Dixon, M.T. Weatherby, Eric Vandervoort, Stephan Blinder, A. Ćeller

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorImaging phantomIterative reconstructionAttenuationMonte Carlo methodImage qualityCorrection for attenuationImage resolutionComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMedical physicsNuclear medicinePhysicsBiomedical engineeringOpticsImage (mathematics)MathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely accepted that iterative reconstructions with attenuation and collimator blurring corrections produce quality images and should therefore be a preferred technique for clinical use. In this study, we test the performance of such algorithms on myocardial perfusion studies in the presence of high activity in subdiaphragmatic organs. Monte Carlo simulations, phantom experiments, and clinical patient studies are used to investigate the effect of advanced reconstruction techniques on the quantitative accuracy of images. We conclude that reconstruction with correction for attenuation and collimator blurring in three dimensions significantly improves image resolution and contrast between areas of different activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207