MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329648102 · doi:10.1117/12.2217324

Detective quantum efficiency: a standard test to ensure optimal detector performance and low patient exposures

2016· article· en· W2329648102 on OpenAlexafffund
Terenz Escartin, Tomi F. Nano, Ian A. Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDetectorTest (biology)Computer scienceQuantumReliability engineeringEngineeringPhysicsQuantum mechanicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The detective quantum efficiency (DQE), expressed as a function of spatial frequency, describes the ability of an x-ray detector to produce high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) images. While regulatory and scientific communities have used the DQE as a primary metric for optimizing detector design, the DQE is rarely used by end users to ensure high system performance is maintained. Of concern is that image quality varies across different systems for the same exposures with no current measures available to describe system performance. Therefore, here we conducted an initial DQE measurement survey of clinical x-ray systems using a DQE-testing instrument to identify their range of performance. Following laboratory validation, experiments revealed that the DQE of five different systems under the same exposure level (8.0 μGy) ranged from 0.36 to 0.75 at low spatial frequencies, and 0.02 to 0.4 at high spatial frequencies (3.5 cycles/mm). Furthermore, the DQE dropped substantially with decreasing detector exposure by a factor of up to 1.5x in the lowest spatial frequency, and a factor of 10x at 3.5 cycles/mm due to the effect of detector readout noise. It is concluded that DQE specifications in purchasing decisions, combined with periodic DQE testing, are important factors to ensure patients receive the health benefits of high-quality images for low x-ray exposures.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207