MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129719872 · doi:10.1117/12.2580455

Theoretical optimization of dual-energy x-ray imaging of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

2021· article· en· W3129719872 on OpenAlexaff
Fateen Basharat, Michael Belli, Miranda Kirby, Jesse Tanguay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFigure of meritCOPDImage qualityX-ray detectorNoise (video)Image resolutionPulmonary diseasePhysicsOpticsNuclear medicineRadiologyMedicineDetectorComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose two-dimensional (2D) dual-energy (DE) x-ray imaging of lung structure and function for the assessment of COPD, and investigate the resulting image quality theoretically using the human observer detectability index (<i>d'</i>) as a figure of merit. We modeled the ability of human observers to detect ventilation defects in xenon enhanced DE (XeDE) images and emphysema in unenhanced DE images. Our model of <i>d'</i> accounted for the extent of emphysematous destruction and functional impairment as a function of defect/lesion contrast, spatial resolution, x-ray scatter, quantum and background anatomical noise power spectrum (NPS), and the efficiency of human observers. The effect of x-ray spectrum and exposure allocation factor on <i>d'</i> was also explored. Our results suggest that, the detectability is maximized for exposure allocation factors that minimize quantum NPS. The optimal combination of tube voltage was found to be ~50/140 kV or 60/140 kV depending on the task and patient at an x-ray exposure equal to that of a standard chest x-ray. In 2D DE x-ray imaging of COPD, the detectability is primarily limited by low contrast, x-ray scatter, and anatomic noise, the latter two of which reduce the detectability of individual defects by 30% and ~&gt;90%, respectively.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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