MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911330804 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab038b

Analytical model of DOI-induced time bias in ultra-fast scintillation detectors for TOF-PET

2019· article· en· W2911330804 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsScintillationCoincidenceDetectorPhysicsEstimatorOpticsAnnihilationCorrection for attenuationMean squared errorPhotonAttenuationComputational physicsStatisticsMathematicsNuclear medicineNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In positron emission tomography (PET), long crystals ([Formula: see text]20 mm) are used to enhance detection efficiency and increase scanner sensitivity. However, for fast time-of-flight (TOF) scanners, this may affect the achievable coincidence time resolution (CTR) due to depth-of-interaction (DOI) induced blur on timing. Currently, the effect of DOI on CTR evaluation with analytical modeling is incorporated using the probability density function (PDF) for attenuation of the annihilation photons with the PDFs of the other scintillation processes. However, we show that the resulting PDF would not describe accurately the variation in timestamps distribution at different DOIs. We propose a new analytical model for the CTR evaluation, which consists of computing a DOI dependent CTR weighted by the DOI probability in coincidence. The CTR was thus defined as the weighted root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the DOI-wise variance and bias in order to explicitly describe the positioning bias induced by coincident annihilation photons at different DOIs. The effect of DOI bias on CTR was investigated by using four classic estimators found in the literature, each applied on contemporary scintillation detectors and nearly ideal detectors. A limited difference in the calculated CTR was found for typical scintillation detectors when assessing RMSE with and without DOI time offset correction. This was expected since the DOI bias remains negligible against other phenomena in such case. However, the difference becomes significant for nearly ideal scintillation detectors, where optimal CTR would only be attainable with DOI correction. For these nearly ideal cases, the revised model has better predictive power since the DOI time offset correction is included. Investigation with analytical approaches for realistically achievable ultra-fast CTR in TOF-PET detectors should be performed with a model that genuinely takes into account the DOI effect. We show that the proposed model is a valid candidate for such a task.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.183 · 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