Statistical limitations in ion imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, we investigated the capacity of various ion beams available for radiotherapy to produce high quality relative stopping power map acquired from energy-loss measurements. The image quality metrics chosen to compare the different ions were signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as a function of dose and spatial resolution. Geant4 Monte Carlo simulations were performed for: hydrogen, helium, lithium, boron and carbon ion beams crossing a 20 cm diameter water phantom to determine SNR and spatial resolution. It has been found that protons possess a significantly larger SNR when compared with other ions at a fixed range (up to 36% higher than helium) due to the proton nuclear stability and low dose per primary. However, it also yields the lowest spatial resolution against all other ions, with a resolution lowered by a factor 4 compared to that of carbon imaging, for a beam with the same initial range. When comparing for a fixed spatial resolution of 10 lp cm −1 , carbon ions produce the highest image quality metrics with proton ions producing the lowest. In conclusion, it has been found that no ion can maximize all image quality metrics simultaneously and that a choice must be made between spatial resolution, SNR, and dose.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".