MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379618708 · doi:10.32920/23325926

Software-based charge sharing correction for spectroscopic x-ray detectors

2023· preprint· en· W4379618708 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Lalonde

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCharge sharingDetectorAlgorithmPhysicsCharge (physics)Energy (signal processing)Computer scienceDistortion (music)Charge-coupled deviceSoftwareX-ray detectorOpticsOptoelectronicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectroscopic x-ray detectors, which are currently under development, may have the potential to revolutionize diagnostic x-ray imaging through their ability to perform single-shot, multi-energy imaging. However, the sharing of charge between neighbouring detector elements results in degraded image quality. The goal of this project was to develop a computer algorithm to correct for the effects of charge sharing. The 3 primary objectives were: (1) to develop a model of the system response of spectroscopic x-ray detectors which accounts for the spatio-energetic effects of charge sharing, (2) to develop a charge sharing correction algorithm, based on the maximum likelihood expectation-maximization (MLEM) algorithm which incorporates the spatio-energetic system response model and (3) to assess the accuracy of the charge sharing correction algorithm by applying it to simulated x-ray images. The MLEM algorithm was able to correct for the spectral distortion resulting from charge sharing with reasonable accuracy. Its performance was somewhat erratic due to the non-linearity of the algorithm, but was found to perform better when applied high-energy x-ray spectra.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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