Parameterizing the Angular Distribution of Emission: A Model for TOF-PET Low-Count Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low-count reconstruction remains a challenge for Positron Emission Tomography (PET) even with the recent progress in time-of-flight (TOF) resolution. In this context, the bias between the acquired histogram, consisting of low values or zeros, and the expected histogram, obtained from the forward projector, is propagated to the image, resulting in a biased reconstruction. This situation could be exacerbated with finer resolution of the TOF information, which further sparsifies the acquired histogram. We propose a new approach to circumvent this limitation of the classical reconstruction model. It consists of extending the description of the reconstruction scheme to also explicitly include the projection domain by Parameterizing the Angular Distribution of Emission (PADE). This parametrization has greater degrees of freedom than the log-likelihood model, which can not be harnessed in classical circumstances. We hypothesize that with ultra-fast TOF this new approach would not only be viable for low-count reconstruction, but also more adequate than the classical reconstruction model. As a proof of concept, an implementation of this approach is compared to the log-likelihood model by investigating two-dimensional simulations of a hot spots phantom. The proposed model achieves similar contrast recovery coefficients as MLEM except for the smallest structures where the low-count nature of the simulations makes it difficult to draw conclusions. However, this new model seems to converge toward less noisy solutions than MLEM. These results suggest that the PADE approach has potential for low-count reconstruction with ultra-fast TOF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".