MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2540332311 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2012.6551874

Slit-slat collimator geometrical calibration for a PET/SPECT dual modality animal scanner

2012· article· en· W2540332311 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-François Beaudoin, J. Cadorette, Charles Naaman, Roger Lecomte, Rutao Yao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsQ & T ResearchUniversité de SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorScannerImaging phantomPhysicsCalibrationOpticsField of viewNuclear medicineIterative reconstructionComputer scienceComputer visionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We developed a cost-effective dual modality PET/SPECT imaging device based on an animal PET scanner. To achieve a large axial field of view (FOV) in the SPECT imaging mode, a slit-slat collimator insert was used. The objective of this work was to assess a method that used the PET imaging capability of the scanner to calibrate the geometrical parameters of the slit-slat collimator, including the slit aperture centers (SACs), axis of rotation (A OR), and slat center positions (SCPs). To calibrate the SAC and AOR values, the inner wedge surfaces of the slit apertures were painted with a18F solution. The slit cylinder was mounted in its SPECT setup and imaged in PET mode at multiple rotational positions. The SAC and AOR values were then estimated from the reconstructed PET images. To calibrate the SCP values, the slat assembly was mounted in its SPECT setup, with a18F capillary line source attached to its inner tube wall and along the scanner's axial direction, and imaged in PET mode. The axial sectional profile of the reconstructed PET image was used to estimate the SCPs. The calibrated geometrical parameters were used to generate the system matrix for SPECT image reconstruction. Phantom studies were performed. It was found that the proposed PET calibration method was easy to setup, fast to perform, and reliable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207