MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774734347

A Method for Narrow Field-Of-View Region-Of-Interest Computed Tomography

2017· article· en· W2774734347 on OpenAlexaff
Esmaeil Enjilela, Esam M.A. Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegion of interestComputer visionArtificial intelligenceImaging phantomIterative reconstructionImage qualityImage (mathematics)PixelComputer scienceField of viewMathematicsOpticsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method for reconstructing of an internal tomographic image for a region-of-interest (RoI) within a section, using narrowed radiation beams. This reduces radiation exposure, and with the aid of an iterative image reconstruction algorithm, RoI images are reconstructed with a quality comparable to conventional computed tomography (CT) full field-of-view images. Region-of-interest image reconstruction is formulated as a discrete problem to avoid the truncated (incomplete) problem associated with the conventional analytic filtered backprojection method. This in turn allows local reconstruction of RoI images without any prior information or constraints. A coarse image of the entire section is first reconstructed with the aid of a modified convex maximum likelihood (MCML) algorithm. The coarse image is then used to account for the effect of the RoI surroundings. With RoI-specific projections, an RoI image is then reconstructed with the MCML method at the desired pixel size. The proposed method is evaluated using an anthropomorphic thorax phantom, with the heart as its RoI, showing an image quality comparable to that of a conventional CT, but with a about 72% reduction in radiation exposure. Unlike existing approaches that require some a prior knowledge of a segment of the image, this approach does not require any prior image information or any constrains on the solution.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207