MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal planar X-ray imaging soft tissue segmentation using a photon counting detector

2019· article· en· W2914539278 on OpenAlexafffund
J. William O’Connell, K. Iniewski, Magdalena Bazalova‐Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Instrumentation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsRedlen Technologies (Canada)University of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCompute Canada
KeywordsImaging phantomDetectorSegmentationMean squared errorPixelMonte Carlo methodEnergy (signal processing)Convolutional neural networkPhysicsOpticsGround truthArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A rigorous method for automated soft tissue segmentation using planar kilovoltage (kV) imaging, a photon counting detector (PCD), and a convolutional neural network is presented. The goal of the project was to determine the optimum number of energy bins in a PCD for soft tissue segmentation. Planar kV X-ray images of solid water (SW) phantoms with varying depth of cartilage were generated with a cone-beam analytical method and parallel-beam Monte Carlo simulations. Simulations were preformed using 2 to 5 PCD energy bins with equal photon fluence distribution. Simulated image signal to noise ratio (SNR) was varied between 10 to 250 measured after transmission through 4 cm of SW. Algorithms using non-linear as well as linear regression were used to predict the amount of cartilage for every pixel of the phantom. These algorithms were evaluated based on the mean squared error (MSE) between their prediction and the ground truth. The best algorithm was used to decompose randomly generated SW and cartilage images with an SNR of 100. These randomly generated images trained a U-Net convolutional neural network to segment the cartilage in the image. The results indicated the smallest MSE occurred for non-linear regression with 4 energy bins over all SNR. The trained U-Net was able to correctly segment all regions of cartilage for the smallest amount of cartilage used (4 mm) and segmented the region with > 99% categorical accuracy by pixel.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of InstrumentationSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207