MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163192796 · doi:10.1109/tns.2007.914320

High Rate Photon Counting CT Using Parallel Digital PET Electronics

2008· article· en· W2163192796 on OpenAlexafffund
Joël Riendeau, P. Bérard, Nicolas Viscogliosi, Marc‐André Tétrault, Fran�ois Lemieux, Roger Lecomte, Réjean Fontaine

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsPreamplifierDetectorPhoton countingPhysicsDead timePositron emission tomographyTomographyOpticsNuclear medicineCMOSOptoelectronicsAmplifier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent developments in detectors and electronics enable both positron emission tomography (PET) and X-ray computed tomography (CT) data to be acquired concurrently using the same detection front-end for dual-modality PET/CT imaging. Moreover, it would potentially allow substantial reduction of cost and housing size, in addition to facilitating image fusion. However, the lower energy signals ( ~60 keV versus 511 keV) and higher photon flux per pixel ( > 1 Mcps versus 10 kcps) in CT relative to PET cause significant pile-up and dead-time in CT data acquired in photon counting mode. A digital signal processing method was developed and implemented to improve processing of detector signals sampled at low frequency (~ 45 MHz) in presence of pile-up. The method consists in digitally subtracting the detector impulse response at the output of the preamplifier to restore the signal baseline for more accurate energy estimation. When compared to a fixed threshold counting technique, the proposed method features better noise immunity, higher energy resolution and 50% higher rates measured at an estimated true rate of 2.75 Mcps, making CT integration within modern digital PET hardware feasible.

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 score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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