ELogs/MatthieuHentz: Difference between revisions
< ELogs
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
=== Higher priority === | === Higher priority === | ||
* Work on progress report | * Work on progress report | ||
* Write code for benchmarking metrics analysis: | * Write code for benchmarking metrics analysis: CDF, noise and relative error | ||
* Get in touch with R Schulte to get access to DROP and TVS-DROP algorithms | ** Design more appropriate phantom to evaluate MTF (cf. Plautz et al., 2016 and Mori and Machida, 2009) | ||
* Get in touch with R Schulte to get access to DROP and TVS-DROP algorithms (Update 18/02/2019: Ask Robert Johnson (rjohnson@ucsc.edu) for access to GitHub repo.) | |||
* Run preliminary simulations to test the metrics | * Run preliminary simulations to test the metrics | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
** Concatenating run ID and event ID to a long string does not work as the string is truncated for some reason. | ** Concatenating run ID and event ID to a long string does not work as the string is truncated for some reason. | ||
** Alternative: Use a short hash? -> Need a hash function | ** Alternative: Use a short hash? -> Need a hash function | ||
* Write script to move the required number of projection files into the current directory | |||
* Edit script 'backproject' to take an argument for the number of projections used | |||
== Completed == | == Completed == | ||
* Implement phantoms to be used to determine MTF and CDF in Geant4: one uniform phantom with a single central non-uniform pixel and another truly uniform phantom ( | * (01/02/2019) Implement phantoms to be used to determine MTF and CDF in Geant4: one uniform phantom with a single central non-uniform pixel and another truly uniform phantom | ||
* (14/02/2019) Write code for benchmarking metrics analysis: MTF | |||
== Current Reading List == | == Current Reading List == | ||
=== Image quality assessment === | |||
* Plautz et al. (including Schulte) 2016 An evaluation of spatial resolution of a prototype proton CT scanner ''Med. Phys.'' '''43''' (12) | |||
=== Proton CT === | |||
* Paganetti H 2012 Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations ''Phys. Med. Biol.'' '''57''' | * Paganetti H 2012 Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations ''Phys. Med. Biol.'' '''57''' | ||
* Johnson R P 2018 Review of medical radiography and tomography with proton beams ''Rep. Prog. Phys.'' '''81''' | * Johnson R P 2018 Review of medical radiography and tomography with proton beams ''Rep. Prog. Phys.'' '''81''' | ||
Latest revision as of 12:19, 19 February 2019
Electronic Log for Matthieu Hentz
To Do
Urgent
- Nada
Higher priority
- Work on progress report
- Write code for benchmarking metrics analysis: CDF, noise and relative error
- Design more appropriate phantom to evaluate MTF (cf. Plautz et al., 2016 and Mori and Machida, 2009)
- Get in touch with R Schulte to get access to DROP and TVS-DROP algorithms (Update 18/02/2019: Ask Robert Johnson (rjohnson@ucsc.edu) for access to GitHub repo.)
- Run preliminary simulations to test the metrics
Lower priority
- Do reconstruction of simulation with >1 billion protons
- Convert ITK images to DICOM
- Assign ID to each proton to simplify matching
- Concatenating run ID and event ID to a long string does not work as the string is truncated for some reason.
- Alternative: Use a short hash? -> Need a hash function
- Write script to move the required number of projection files into the current directory
- Edit script 'backproject' to take an argument for the number of projections used
Completed
- (01/02/2019) Implement phantoms to be used to determine MTF and CDF in Geant4: one uniform phantom with a single central non-uniform pixel and another truly uniform phantom
- (14/02/2019) Write code for benchmarking metrics analysis: MTF
Current Reading List
Image quality assessment
- Plautz et al. (including Schulte) 2016 An evaluation of spatial resolution of a prototype proton CT scanner Med. Phys. 43 (12)
Proton CT
- Paganetti H 2012 Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations Phys. Med. Biol. 57
- Johnson R P 2018 Review of medical radiography and tomography with proton beams Rep. Prog. Phys. 81
- Arbor N et al. 2015 Monte Carlo comparison of x-ray and proton CT for range calculations of proton therapy beams Phys. Med. Biol. 60
- Rädler M 2018 Two-dimensional noise reconstruction in proton computed tomography using distance-driven filtered back-projection of simulated projections Phys. Med. Biol. 63
- Brooke M and Penfold S 2018 An inhomogeneous most likely path formalism for proton computed tomography arXiv:1808.00122v1