MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173216213 · doi:10.1109/23.873027

Study of light collection in multi-crystal detectors

2000· article· en· W2173216213 on OpenAlexaff
A. Saoudi, C. Pépin, Roger Lecomte

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotomultiplierOpticsPhotodetectorAvalanche photodiodeWavelengthOptoelectronicsDetectorMaterials scienceRefractive indexPhotodiodeCrystal (programming language)Light scatteringIntegrating spherePhysicsScattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phoswich detectors are currently being considered by a number of investigators for depth-of-interaction measurement in PET and multi-modality emission/transmission imaging. Many parameters affect light collection and S/N ratio from such detectors made of crystals having different emission wavelength, refractive index and light output. In this work, the effects of crystal intrinsic and extrinsic properties on light propagation and light collection efficiency were studied. Avalanche photodiode (APD) and photomultiplier tube (PMT) readouts were used to study the light output at different wavelengths. Experiments and simulations with DETECT97 have shown that light collection efficiency and energy resolution degrade steadily with distance from photodetector, mainly as a result of additional crystal interfaces. Simulations indicate that ground surfaces and high reflectivity diffuse reflectors maximise light output, but measurements tend to show that similar results are obtained with polished surfaces due to the presence of crystal defects. An excitation band at 400 nm in GSO is found to absorb a fraction of the light from LSO. This effect is more significant with the PMT photodetector, which has its maximum sensitivity in the 400-nm range. Inconsistent results observed for LSO and YSO are shown to be compatible with the presence of light scattering within these crystals.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207