MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Shielding Free PET Insert for High Sensitivity PET/MRI of the Brain

2024· article· en· W4402834273 on OpenAlexafffund
Madeline Rapley, Viktoriia Batarchuk, Yurii Shepelytskyi, Alexander Babich, Harutyun Poladyan, Oleksandr Bubon, Mitchell S. Albert, A. Reznik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTerry Fox FoundationOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsElectromagnetic shieldingSensitivity (control systems)Insert (composites)Positron emission tomographyMaterials scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringPhysicsMedicineEngineeringElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work outlines MRI compatibility tests of a shielding free PET insert for high sensitivity, cost effective PET/MRI imaging of the brain. The MRI compatibility of silicon photomultiplier based PET detectors, originally developed for an organ targeted PET camera, was explored through MRI and PET performance. To analyze the effect of passive and active PET modules on MRI performance, T1-weighted gradient echo images and B1 maps were acquired. The effect of passive and active MRI on PET performance was evaluated using, crystal maps, energy spectra, and images of a 22-Na point source. The average mean squared error between central slice B1 maps with and without passive PET detectors was 0.003 and the structural similarity index was 0.975. For the active PET experiment, these values were 0.054 and 0.891, respectively. There was no significant change in coefficient of variation of B1 intensity due to the active state of PET detectors. The PET crystal map results showed that the spatial distribution of events was not affected by the passive B0 field of the MRI or a simultaneous MRI acquisition. The same result was found for the peak position and full width at half maximum of the energy spectra in PET data. No difference was observed between trials in the reconstructed images of a 22 Na point source. Despite the lack of shielding, the MRI compatibility of Radialis PET detectors was supported by our results, suggesting they will be usable in the proposed PET insert for high sensitivity PET/MRI of the brain.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→