MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Contaminant detection in non-destructive testing using a CZT photon-counting detector

2021· article· en· W3123548878 on OpenAlexaff
Devon Richtsmeier, E. Guliyev, K. Iniewski, Magdalena Bazalova‐Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Instrumentation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsRedlen Technologies (Canada)University of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorBinImaging phantomPhoton countingPixelEnergy (signal processing)SortingX-ray detectorOpticsNoise (video)PhotonContaminationPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With recent advances in the growth of CdZnTe (CZT) sensors, high-flux photon-counting detectors (PCDs) have begun to see more use commercially in non-destructive testing (NDT). One such application is food inspection, where radiography is currently used to detect undesirable contaminants introduced in the production and packaging processes. PCDs can offer better detection than conventional radiography due to the preservation of energy data by analyzing the pulse height of each x-ray detection and sorting the x-ray into one of a number of energy bins. However, there are a number of parameters that must be explored in order to offer efficient and efficacious detection of contaminants. Here, two such parameters were investigated in a phantom study with an 8×24 mm 2 CZT detector for a number of common contaminant materials. The detectability of contaminants was evaluated based on their contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 2D transmission images. First, the energy bin demonstrating the highest CNR for each contaminant material was found by adjusting the threshold energies defining the edges of the bin. Second, various pixel binning schemes were utilized to lower noise and investigate the effect on the detectability based on the size of contaminants. CNR was maximized for pixel binning that corresponded to the approximate size of the contaminant objects in x-ray images.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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