MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170735525 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.1997.670516

Comparison of two systems of multiple line sources for SPECT transmission scanning

2002· article· en· W2170735525 on OpenAlexaff
A. Ćeller, Arkadiusz Sitek, R. Harrop, P C Hawman

Bibliographic record

Venue1997 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttenuationImaging phantomCollimated lightArtifact (error)Computer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Line (geometry)Noise (video)Transmission lineCorrection for attenuationLine sourceOpticsElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematicsImage (mathematics)TelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors have proposed a new design for a transmission source which uses a system of multiple parallel line sources. It does not require complicated hardware, it allows the activity distribution to be tailored to the shape of the human body, minimizes both the amount of activity being used and patient dose, and substantially reduces the problem of low counts in transmission scans which can arise when large patients are scanned. The authors have built and investigated two systems based on line sources, namely the Collimated Line Sources (CLS) (10 lines) and the Multiple Line Array (MLA) (20 lines). Since they use different source positions and collimations, the systems require different approaches to the data processing and map reconstruction. This study presents a comparison of the results of simulations and phantom experiments performed using these two systems. Qualitative and quantitative analyzes of the attenuation maps were performed. The results of the authors' tests showed that transmission maps obtained with multiple line sources are artifact free, have good uniformity, 2-3% accuracy, about 1-1.5 cm resolution, and acceptable levels of noise. Preliminary simultaneous emission/transmission studies using MLA system and involving both phantom and patients have demonstrated that these maps can be successfully used to correct for attenuation.

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 score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.358
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

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue1997 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference RecordSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207