MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389793009 · doi:10.3389/feart.2023.1287059

Tomographic reconstruction strategies for nondestructive testing with a commercial CT scanner

2023· article· en· W4389793009 on OpenAlexaff
Leonardo Di Schiavi Trotta, Dmitri Matenine, Yannick Lemaréchal, Margherita Martini, Karl Stierstorfer, Mathieu Des Roches, Philippe Letellier, Pierre Francus, Philippe Després

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Earth Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScannerIterative reconstructionComputer sciencePixelProjectorImage qualityComputer visionImage resolutionAlgorithmReconstruction algorithmArtificial intelligenceTomographic reconstructionPreprocessorImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a framework was developed to access and process raw data from a commercial X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) scanner for research purposes. Our method requires vendor-provided binaries to convert the data to a readable format and also to remove the effect of proprietary beam hardening preprocessing. As a result, custom reconstruction techniques, including beam-hardening corrections algorithms, can be applied. Small region-of-interest CT imaging techniques and different backprojection algorithms were investigated to improve image quality (spatial resolution, noise) with an in-house iterative reconstruction algorithm. For a reconstruction matrix of 512 pixels × 512 pixels, processing times of approximately 2.5 s per slice were obtained using a set of 8 x GPUs. With this framework, high-quality images of high density samples (e.g., minerals) can be obtained with reduced truncation-induced blurring, free of artifacts stemming from the reconstruction process and reduced beam-hardening artifacts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Earth ScienceSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207