Time determination of BGO-APD detectors by digital signal processing for positron emission tomography
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coincidence timing resolution in positron emission tomography (PET) can be improved by replacing fast analog pulse shaping and constant fraction discriminator (CFD) with fully digital signal processing. This can be achieved by digitizing the signal from individual detectors using 100-MHz 8-bit analog-to-digital converters (ADC) and processing the data in field programmable gate arrays (FPGA). Various digital implementation of filters and baseline restorers have been combined with numerical least mean square fit to the data to extract the time of interaction and the energy deposited in BGOAPD detectors. Using the same detector and pre-amplifier, a time resolution of 7.2 ns was obtained with digital techniques, as compare to 12.7 ns with the conventional analog method. By reducing the BGO-BGO coincidence time window by more than /spl sim/40 %, an equivalent reduction of the rate of random events can be obtained, which would improve image SNR significantly at high counting rate in a BGO-APD PET scanner. The proposed digital techniques can be readily adapted to other faster detectors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it