MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221061719 · doi:10.1117/12.2610771

Experimental optimization of the exposure allocation for xenon-enhanced dual-energy x-ray imaging of lung function

2022· article· en· W4221061719 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fateen Basharat, Jesse Tanguay

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Imaging 2022: Physics of Medical Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomNoise (video)PhysicsContrast-to-noise ratioImage qualityNuclear medicineCOPDVentilation (architecture)OpticsMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent airflow limitation resulting from emphysema and small airway disease. In our recent work we proposed xenon-enhanced dual-energy (XeDE) radiography for functional imaging of COPD. Using mathematical models, we showed that XeDE radiography has the potential to enable detecting functional abnormalities associated with early-stage COPD. The purpose of this study is to investigate the optimal exposure allocation for XeDE X-ray imaging of lung function by experiment and to validate the predictions of our theoretical model. Experiments were conducted using a custom-built chest phantom representing an adult female chest and containing a simulated ventilation defect. The phantom was imaged using a CsI/CMOS energy integrating X-ray detector (XINEOS-3030HS, Teledyne DALSA - Professional Imaging, Ontario, Canada) with a 151.8 µm pixel pitch. The low-energy (LE) and highenergy (HE) tube voltages were fixed at 60 kV and 140 kV respectively. We define the exposure allocation factor (f ) as the ratio of HE entrance exposure [Roentgens] to the LE entrance exposure. The value of (f ) was varied from 0.25 to 2 while keeping the total entrance exposure fixed at ∼60 mR. We used contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) normalized by the square root of total entrance exposure as a figure of merit. Our theoretical model of CNR accounted for the contrast of ventilation defects, quantum noise and X-ray scatter. Quantum noise was calculated using cascaded system analysis accounting for the quantum efficiency, K fluorescence, optical collection efficiency, optical blur and noise aliasing. Our models of defect contrast, noise and CNR agreed well with experimental results. The theoretical and experimental results show that the optimal exposure allocation is f = 0.5 indicating that ∼2/3 of the total exposure should be allocated to LE image.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.237
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Imaging 2022: Physics of Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207