MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405012832 · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111873

The impact of long axial field of view (LAFOV) PET on oncologic imaging

2024· review· en· W4405012832 on OpenAlexaff
Gary Cook, Ian Alberts, Thomas Wagner, Barbara Malene Fischer, Muhummad Sohaib Nazir, David M.L. Lilburn

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Radiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersMedical Research CouncilCancer Research UKWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineMedical physicsNuclear medicineField (mathematics)Radiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rb]), opening up applications that hitherto have been challenging. It is early in the evolution of LAFOV PET/CT and the advantages these systems offer have still to be fully realised in providing additional impact in clinical practice. In this article we describe the potential advantages of LAFOV PET technology and some of the clinical and research applications where it has been applied as well as some of the future developments that may enhance the modality further.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of RadiologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207