MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2922281683 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab0efa

Towards a second-generation PET/MR insert with enhanced timing and count rate performance

2019· article· en· W2922281683 on OpenAlexafffund
Devin Van Elburg, Ravi Shrestha, Andrew L. Goertzen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch Manitoba
KeywordsSilicon photomultiplierDetectorFull width at half maximumPhysicsPhotomultiplierOpticsSIGNAL (programming language)Nuclear electronicsDead timeWaveformCoincidenceScintillatorVoltageComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously we have developed a first-generation PET insert prototype for small animal PET/MR imaging, which used resistor-based charge division multiplexing circuits and SensL B-series silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs). In this work we present results from a second-generation readout board with improved timing and count rate performance. Three detector boards were tested: the first-generation readout board with SensL SPMArray4B (SiPM-B), the second-generation readout board with SensL ArrayC-30035-16P-PCB (SiPM-C) using the 'fast' outputs for timing, and the second generation board using Hamamatsu S11361-3050AE-04 MPPC arrays. Timing data were obtained with detector modules in coincidence with a single-pixel SensL MicroFJ-SMA-30035 reference detector and acquired using standard NIM electronics, while count rate data were acquired using the OpenPET data acquisition electronics system. The full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) coincidence time resolution (CTR) for the SiPM-B, SiPM-C and MPPC designs were 2600 ± 200 ps, 550 ± 50 ps, and 570 ± 30 ps, respectively. OpenPET waveform capture determined the mean signal durations, measured as time above 10% of the maximum amplitude, were 1850 ± 150 ns, 600 ± 25 ns, and 350 ± 25 ns, respectively, where the short signal of the MPPC resulted in reduced pileup effects at higher count rates. Decaying source measurements showed a non-paralyzable dead time of 1.30-1.41 µs for all three detectors tested, which was limited by the signal capture and processing time of the OpenPET system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→