MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393176831 · doi:10.1097/hp.0000000000001794

Optimizing the Positioning of Detectors for Improved Counting Efficiencies Using Monte Carlo Simulations

2024· article· en· W4393176831 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin Capello, Ryan Moffat, A. Schiebelbein

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodDetectorImaging phantomCounting efficiencyComputer scienceEnergy (signal processing)Whole body countingPhysicsNuclear engineeringSimulationMedical physicsOpticsNuclear physicsEngineeringMathematicsStatisticsRadionuclide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The Human Monitoring Laboratory (HML) at Health Canada updated its whole-body counter with four new electrically cooled HPGe detectors. To optimize the counting efficiency of the new system, Monte Carlo simulation was used to model the whole-body counter using a reference BOMAB male phantom. The resulting modeled counting efficiencies showed that the best position to install the four new detectors could be obtained without performing laborious real measurements, thereby reducing the cost of preparing the BOMAB phantoms and reconfiguring the detector arrays in multiple geometries, saving time and energy.

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 score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PhysicsSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207