MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232821612 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2003.1352433

Implementation of an analytically based scatter correction in SPECT reconstructions

2003· article· en· W4232821612 on OpenAlexaff
E. Vandervoort, A. Ćeller, G. Wells, S. Blinder, K. Dixon, Y. Pang

Bibliographic record

Venue2003 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37515) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityLawson Health Research InstituteVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorAttenuationIterative reconstructionCorrection for attenuationComputer scienceProjection (relational algebra)Image qualityContrast (vision)OpticsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSingle-photon emission computed tomographyScatteringPhysicsAlgorithmImage (mathematics)Nuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photon scattering is one of the main effects contributing to the degradation of image quality and to quantitative inaccuracy in nuclear imaging. We have developed a scatter correction based on the analytic photon distribution (APD) method, and implemented it in an iterative image reconstruction algorithm. The performance of the method was evaluated using computer simulated projection data, experimental data obtained from physical phantoms, and patient data. The scatter corrected images were compared to images that were only corrected for attenuation and collimator blurring. In the simulation studies our results could also be compared to an ideal scatter correction in which images were reconstructed only from unscattered photon data. In all cases, our scatter corrected images demonstrate improved image contrast. In the simulated data the contrast for images only corrected for attenuation and collimator blurring were on average 29% poorer than the ideal correction. Images for which our scatter correction was applied had contrast that was on average within 3% of the ideal correction. The scatter corrected reconstruction requires between 4 to 5 hours of total CPU time, on a 1.7 GHz processor with 1Gb RDRAM, using clinical data.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2003 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37515)Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207