SU‐C‐207A‐01: A Novel Maximum Likelihood Method for High‐Resolution Proton Radiography/proton CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Multiple Coulomb scattering is the largest contributor to blurring in proton imaging. Here we tested a maximum likelihood least squares estimator (MLLSE) to improve the spatial resolution of proton radiography (pRad) and proton computed tomography (pCT). Methods: The object is discretized into voxels and the average relative stopping power through voxel columns defined from the source to the detector pixels is optimized such that it maximizes the likelihood of the proton energy loss. The length spent by individual protons in each column is calculated through an optimized cubic spline estimate. pRad images were first produced using Geant4 simulations. An anthropomorphic head phantom and the Catphan line‐pair module for 3‐D spatial resolution were studied and resulting images were analyzed. Both parallel and conical beam have been investigated for simulated pRad acquisition. Then, experimental data of a pediatric head phantom (CIRS) were acquired using a recently completed experimental pCT scanner. Specific filters were applied on proton angle and energy loss data to remove proton histories that underwent nuclear interactions. The MTF10% (lp/mm) was used to evaluate and compare spatial resolution. Results: Numerical simulations showed improvement in the pRad spatial resolution for the parallel (2.75 to 6.71 lp/cm) and conical beam (3.08 to 5.83 lp/cm) reconstructed with the MLLSE compared to averaging detector pixel signals. For full tomographic reconstruction, the improved pRad were used as input into a simultaneous algebraic reconstruction algorithm. The Catphan pCT reconstruction based on the MLLSE‐enhanced projection showed spatial resolution improvement for the parallel (2.83 to 5.86 lp/cm) and conical beam (3.03 to 5.15 lp/cm). The anthropomorphic head pCT displayed important contrast gains in high‐gradient regions. Experimental results also demonstrated significant improvement in spatial resolution of the pediatric head radiography. Conclusion: The proposed MLLSE shows promising potential to increase the spatial resolution (up to 244%) in proton imaging.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".