MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405189282 · doi:10.32628/ijsrst24116198

Accuracy of Iodine and Calcium Concentrations in Dual Energy Computed Tomography (DECT)

2024· article· en· W4405189282 on OpenAlexaff
Pingki S. Dewi, Choirul Anam, Heri Sutanto, Ariij Naufal, Sarah I. Izmi, Revita Dewantari, Ilham Alkian, Adiwasono M. B. Setiawan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsCytodiagnostics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomIodineCalciumNuclear medicineMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringChemistryRadiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess accuracies of iodine and calcium concentrations in dual energy computed tomography (DECT). Method: This study was performed using an in-house phantom made from polyester resin. The in-house phantom had a diameter of 16 cm and had 10 holes filled with iodine (with concentrations of 5, 7.5, 10, and 15 mg/ml), calcium (with concentrations 200, 300, 500, and 600 mg/ml), water, and air. The in-house phantom was scanned by an Ultrafast kV Switching DECT (GE Revolution) with a tube voltage of 80/140 kV, rotation time of 0.5 s, and tube current variations of 200, 250, 300, 335, and 370 mA. Images was reconstructed to a material density image (MDI). The iodine and calcium concentrations were measured using GSI Viewer software and compared with set iodine and calcium concentrations. Results: It was found that absolute percentage error (APE) of concentrations on iodine was <12% and on calcium was <25% for all concentration variations. Hence, the APE of iodine is smaller than that of calcium. It was found that increasing the tube current does not necessarily improve the accuracy of iodine and calcium concentration measurements. Conclusion: Measurements of iodine and calcium concentrations have been carried out on DECT using an in-house phantom. Overall, iodine and calcium quantification in DECT using the in-house phantom is accurate.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Science and TechnologySame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207