The jPET-D4: Imaging Performance of the 4-Layer Depth-of-Interaction PET Scanner

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Yamaya ◽  
E. Yoshida ◽  
M. Satoh ◽  
T. Tsuda ◽  
K. Kitamura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Depth Of Interaction ◽  
Layer Depth ◽  
Imaging Performance

Simplified simulation of four-layer depth of interaction detector for PET

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideaki Haneishi ◽  
Masanobu Sato ◽  
Naoko Inadama ◽  
Hideo Murayama
Keyword(s):  
Depth Of Interaction ◽  
Layer Depth

A four-Layer depth of interaction detector block for small animal PET

2004 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 2537-2542 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Tsuda ◽  
H. Murayama ◽  
K. Kitamura ◽  
T. Yamaya ◽  
E. Yoshida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Small Animal ◽  
Small Animal Pet ◽  
Depth Of Interaction ◽  
Layer Depth ◽  
Animal Pet ◽  
Detector Block

scholarly journals High resolution monolithic LYSO detector with 6-layer depth-of-interaction for clinical PET

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariele Stockhoff ◽  
Milan Decuyper ◽  
Roel Van Holen ◽  
Stefaan Vandenberghe
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Depth Of Interaction ◽  
Layer Depth

The influence of confocal microscope design on imaging performance

1993 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 144-145
Author(s):  
C J R Sheppard
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Fluorescence Imaging ◽  
Confocal Microscope ◽  
Industrial Applications ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Design Parameters ◽  
Weak Signals ◽  
Size And Shape ◽  
Imaging Performance ◽  
Fundamental Limitation

The confocal microscope is now widely used in both biomedical and industrial applications for imaging, in three dimensions, objects with appreciable depth. There are now a range of different microscopes on the market, which have adopted a variety of different designs. The aim of this paper is to explore the effects on imaging performance of design parameters including the method of scanning, the type of detector, and the size and shape of the confocal aperture.It is becoming apparent that there is no such thing as an ideal confocal microscope: all systems have limitations and the best compromise depends on what the microscope is used for and how it is used. The most important compromise at present is between image quality and speed of scanning, which is particularly apparent when imaging with very weak signals. If great speed is not of importance, then the fundamental limitation for fluorescence imaging is the detection of sufficient numbers of photons before the fluorochrome bleaches.

A new method for the observation of Type II magnetic contrast

1990 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 764-765
Author(s):  
R.P. Ferrier ◽  
S. McVitie
Keyword(s):  
Domain Walls ◽  
Incident Beam ◽  
Objective Lens ◽  
Type Ii ◽  
Backscattering Coefficient ◽  
Magnetic Contrast ◽  
Standard Geometry ◽  
Backscattered Electron ◽  
Imaging Performance ◽  
Good Probe

Type II magnetic contrast was first observed by Philibert and Tixier and relies on the change in the effective backscattering coefficient due to interaction of the scattered electrons within the specimen and the local magnetic induction (for a review see Tsuno). Depending on the tilt of the specimen and the position of the backscattered electron detector(s), contrast due to the presence of either or both domains and domain walls can be obtained; in the case of the latter, the standard geometry is for the specimen to be normal to the incident beam and the detectors are positioned above it and close to the optic axis. This is the geometry adopted in our studies, which used a JEOL 2000FX with a special split objective lens polepiece; this permitted the specimen to be in magnetic field-free space, the separate lens gaps above and below allowing good probe forming capabilities combined with excellent Lorentz imaging performance. A schematic diagram is shown in Fig. 1.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document