MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2500315628 · doi:10.1118/1.4959551

Resolution recovery for Compton camera using origin ensemble algorithm

2016· article· en· W2500315628 on OpenAlexafffund
Andriy Andreyev, A. Ćeller, İlker Özşahin, Arkadiusz Sitek

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
FundersInstitute of GeneticsNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsImaging phantomAlgorithmIterative reconstructionMonte Carlo methodImage resolutionReconstruction algorithmSensitivity (control systems)ComputationComputer scienceDetectorExpectation–maximization algorithmResolution (logic)Collimated lightComputer visionArtificial intelligencePhysicsOpticsMathematicsMaximum likelihood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Compton cameras (CCs) use electronic collimation to reconstruct the images of activity distribution. Although this approach can greatly improve imaging efficiency, due to complex geometry of the CC principle, image reconstruction with the standard iterative algorithms, such as ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM), can be very time-consuming, even more so if resolution recovery (RR) is implemented. We have previously shown that the origin ensemble (OE) algorithm can be used for the reconstruction of the CC data. Here we propose a method of extending our OE algorithm to include RR. METHODS: To validate the proposed algorithm we used Monte Carlo simulations of a CC composed of multiple layers of pixelated CZT detectors and designed for imaging small animals. A series of CC acquisitions of small hot spheres and the Derenzo phantom placed in air were simulated. Images obtained from (a) the exact data, (b) blurred data but reconstructed without resolution recovery, and (c) blurred and reconstructed with resolution recovery were compared. Furthermore, the reconstructed contrast-to-background ratios were investigated using the phantom with nine spheres placed in a hot background. RESULTS: Our simulations demonstrate that the proposed method allows for the recovery of the resolution loss that is due to imperfect accuracy of event detection. Additionally, tests of camera sensitivity corresponding to different detector configurations demonstrate that the proposed CC design has sensitivity comparable to PET. When the same number of events were considered, the computation time per iteration increased only by a factor of 2 when OE reconstruction with the resolution recovery correction was performed relative to the original OE algorithm. We estimate that the addition of resolution recovery to the OSEM would increase reconstruction times by 2-3 orders of magnitude per iteration. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our tests demonstrate the improvement of image resolution provided by the OE reconstructions with resolution recovery. The quality of images and their contrast are similar to those obtained from the OE reconstructions from scans simulated with perfect energy and spatial resolutions.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations48
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207