4.0 Article

Dark Count Resilient Time Estimators for Time-of-Flight PET

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TRPMS.2019.2920746

Keywords

Artificial neural networks (ANNs); digital silicon photomultiplier (DSiPM); Gauss-Markov; photodetector technology; positron emission tomography (PET); radiation detectors for medical applications; single photon avalanche diode (SPAD); time-of-flight (ToF)

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Fond de Recherche Nature et Technologie
  3. Compute Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A better timing resolution for positron emission tomography (PET) detectors adds time-of-flight information to increase the image contrast. The timing resolution can be improved by timestamping multiple photons from a scintillation event and combining the information using the mean or the Gauss-Markov estimator. To circumvent the performance degradation incurred by these estimators at higher dark count rates (DCRs), two dark count resilient algorithms were studied independently in the literature: the filtered Gauss-Markov and the artificial neural networks. This paper presents parametric simulations that compare them under different DCR conditions. We studied two different types of scintillator-based digital silicon photomultipliers : a typical 1 x 1 x 10 mm(3) LYSO:Ce crystal paired with a 180 ps single photon timing resolution (SPTR) photodetector and a fast 1 x 1 x 3 mm(3) LYSO:Ce:rCa crystal paired with a 35 ps SPTR photodetector. For a single photon avalanche diode with DCR over 1 Hz/mu m(2), simulations show a significant coincidence timing resolution (CTR) gain when using the filtered Gauss-Markov estimator, improving the CTR of the typical detector by 10% and the fast detector by 33% over the unfiltered Gauss-Markov estimator. In all evaluated cases, the filtered Gauss-Markov estimator yields the lowest CTR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available