Mis-registration between emission and transmission data in cardiac PET/CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The availability of PET/CT has made CT a popular option for attenuation correction (AC) as it can obtain nearly noise-free transmission (Tx) maps faster and with higher resolution than the standard Ge Tx scan. Due to a large difference in the emission (Em) and CT scan times, organ motion can lead to mis-registration and consequently inaccurate AC resulting in erroneous reconstructed images. This study compares the effects of CT to Ge AC methods on the activity distribution of the myocardial wall in PET images. Simulations, containing respiratory motion, were conducted using the NCAT digital phantom linked to the SimSET Monte Carlo program. Gated Em and Tx data were generated over one respiratory cycle, divided into 20 gates. Three approaches to AC were considered. 1) The average Em map with the average Tx map (Ge scan). 2) Gated Em data with gated Tx data (best correction). 3) The average Em map with 3 Tx maps, representing 3 points in the respiratory cycle (CT scans). Circumferential profiles of transaxial slices through the mid-ventricular heart region were plotted for each AC method. Most of the image profiles matched closely, but one CT map showed deviations as large as 25%. This CT map corresponded to full exhalation in the respiratory cycle. Inconsistent heart profiles indicate that CT corrected images can differ from the standard Ge corrected images. These inhomogeneities are a concern as they may lead to misdiagnosis of cardiac viability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".