MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118791832 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/abd952

Performance evaluation of the mouse version of the LabPET II PET scanner

2021· article· en· W3118791832 on OpenAlexafffund
Émilie Gaudin, Christian Thibaudeau, Louis Arpin, Jean‐Daniel Leroux, Maxime Toussaint, Jean-François Beaudoin, J. Cadorette, Maxime Paillé, C. Pépin, Konin Koua, Jonathan Bouchard, Nicolas Viscogliosi, Caroline Paulin, Réjean Fontaine, Roger Lecomte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueQ & T ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScannerImaging phantomImage resolutionDetectorPositron emission tomographySilicon photomultiplierAvalanche photodiodeOpticsPhysicsNuclear medicineMedical physicsMaterials scienceScintillatorMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The LabPET II is a new positron emission tomography technology platform designed to achieve submillimetric spatial resolution imaging using fully pixelated avalanche photodiodes-based detectors and highly integrated parallel front-end processing electronics. The detector was designed as a generic building block to develop devices for preclinical imaging of small to mid-sized animals and for clinical imaging of the human brain. The aim of this work is to assess the physical characteristics and imaging performance of the mouse version of LabPET II scanner following the NEMA NU4-2008 standard and using high resolution phantoms and in vivo imaging applications. A reconstructed spatial resolution of 0.78 mm (0.5 μ l) is measured close to the center of the radial field of view. With an energy window of 350 650 keV, the system absolute sensitivity is 1.2% and its maximum noise equivalent count rate reaches 61.1 kcps at 117 MBq. Submillimetric spatial resolution is achieved in a hot spot phantom and tiny bone structures were resolved with unprecedented contrast in the mouse. These results provide convincing evidence of the capabilities of the LabPET II technology for biomolecular imaging in preclinical research.

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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207