Next Article in Journal
Prevalence and Characteristics of Isolated Nocturnal Hypertension and Masked Nocturnal Hypertension in a Tertiary Hospital in the City of Buenos Aires
Previous Article in Journal
Deep Active Learning for Automatic Mitotic Cell Detection on HEp-2 Specimen Medical Images
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Air Kerma Calculation in Diagnostic Medical Imaging Devices Using Group Method of Data Handling Network

1
College of Information Engineering, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China
2
Department of Digital Media Technology, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310018, China
3
Department of Radiology, Taizhou First People’s Hospital, Taizhou 318000, China
4
Department of Physics, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium
5
Department of General Surgery, Pingyang Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325000, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diagnostics 2023, 13(8), 1418; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081418
Submission received: 6 March 2023 / Revised: 4 April 2023 / Accepted: 9 April 2023 / Published: 14 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Medical Imaging and Theranostics)

Abstract

:
The air kerma, which is the amount of energy given off by a radioactive substance, is essential for medical specialists who use radiation to diagnose cancer problems. The amount of energy that a photon has when it hits something can be described as the air kerma (the amount of energy that was deposited in the air when the photon passed through it). Radiation beam intensity is represented by this value. Hospital X-ray equipment has to account for the heel effect, which means that the borders of the picture obtain a lesser radiation dosage than the center, and that air kerma is not symmetrical. The voltage of the X-ray machine can also affect the uniformity of the radiation. This work presents a model-based approach to predict air kerma at various locations inside the radiation field of medical imaging instruments, making use of just a small number of measurements. Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) neural networks are suggested for this purpose. Firstly, a medical X-ray tube was modeled using Monte Carlo N Particle (MCNP) code simulation algorithm. X-ray tubes and detectors make up medical X-ray CT imaging systems. An X-ray tube’s electron filament, thin wire, and metal target produce a picture of the electrons’ target. A small rectangular electron source modeled electron filaments. An electron source target was a thin, 19,290 kg/m3 tungsten cube in a tubular hoover chamber. The electron source–object axis of the simulation object is 20° from the vertical. For most medical X-ray imaging applications, the kerma of the air was calculated at a variety of discrete locations within the conical X-ray beam, providing an accurate data set for network training. Various locations were taken into account in the aforementioned voltages inside the radiation field as the input of the GMDH network. For diagnostic radiology applications, the trained GMDH model could determine the air kerma at any location in the X-ray field of view and for a wide range of X-ray tube voltages with a Mean Relative Error (MRE) of less than 0.25%. This study yielded the following results: (1) The heel effect is included when calculating air kerma. (2) Computing the air kerma using an artificial neural network trained with minimal data. (3) An artificial neural network quickly and reliably calculated air kerma. (4) Figuring out the air kerma for the operating voltage of medical tubes. The high accuracy of the trained neural network in determining air kerma guarantees the usability of the presented method in operational conditions.

1. Introduction

There are two steps in the process by which photons impart their energy to matter. The interaction of photons with matter first transfers energy to the charge carriers of matter. The charge carriers’ kinetic energy is then deposited by the ionized and excited atoms. By dividing the total kinetic energy of the charged particles (such as electrons, protons, and other charged atoms) that are released when the rays impact something, we may obtain a measure of the radiation that goes through that item; this measure is called the kerma. Kinetic energy divided by matter mass yields this value [1]. Ionizing radiation without a charge is referred to as “kerma” by scientists. The quantity of radiation that has been absorbed is equal to the amount of kerma, which is measured in gray. A mass of air has the same amount of kerma as another mass of air. As measuring air kerma is much easier than measuring the dosage, it is often used for radiation equipment calibration [2]. In interventional radiology, if the skin dosage is high enough to induce radiographic burns to the patient, air kerma computation is also used to forecast the skin dose [3]. Researchers have recently been interested in studying the air kerma created by X-ray tubes. Another article looked at how changing the anode angle or the wave voltage of the X-ray tube affected the air kerma. A Philips MCN165 was used to test the X-ray tube model at a voltage range of 40 to 140 kV [4]. In this investigation, it was found that raising the anode angle had the same effect on airflow as raising the supply voltage. They also claim that the air kerma lessens the severity of wrinkles. After introducing the Monte Carlo simulator for a sodium iodide detector, Oliveira et al. [5] developed a spectral separation method for determining the air kerma from X-rays. Without the suggested spectrum stripping procedure, the discrepancy between the derived spectrum and the reference spectrum was over 63%, but it was reduced to less than 0.2%. The kerma of the chest wall in kids and teens was investigated by Porto et al. [6]. According to the findings of this study, air tension falls as tube voltage rises and exposure falls. Air kerma has been measured and reported on by researchers in the medical and industrial sectors [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. These analyses did not include the rest of the X-ray tube’s radiation field in their estimation of air kerma at the tube’s core. It should be noted that the quantity of air kerma changes with the angle inside the X-ray beam, even when the anode is kept at a constant distance. The anode heel effect is the source of this discrepancy. These analyses did not include the rest of the X-ray tube’s radiation field in their estimation of air kerma at the tube’s core. Notably, the quantity of air kerma changes with distance from the anode in the radiation field. The anode heel effect is to blame for the discrepancy between these values. Some researchers have investigated the heel effect in the radiation field. In Ref. [16] researchers have tried to determine air kerma using an intelligent method. Although they used the MLP neural network to predict air kerma, the accuracy of the methodology they presented in air kerma prediction was not high. In the next research [17], the researchers investigated the performance of the RBF neural network for forecasting air kerma. Although the accuracy increased, it is predicted that by selecting the appropriate neural network, the accuracy in determining air kerma can be increased even more. Despite the existence of the anode heel effect, this research presents a technique for accurately estimating air kerma. The air kerma was computed and simulated using the Monte Carlo N Particle (MCNP) algorithm at six different X-ray tube voltages and various distances to the source. Using the MCNP code’s sparse data, a Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) neural network is trained to generate predictions about the air kerma. The trained neural network can calculate the air kerma for any given X-ray tube voltage and position in the X-ray field. While the MCNP algorithm may be used to calculate air kerma, this is a time-consuming procedure, hence it is more efficient to employ a neural network to make predictions about air kerma. The present investigation is organized as follows: A thorough description of the structure that the MCNP algorithm simulates is provided in Section 2. In the next section, these simulation data are used to teach the GMDH neural network. The findings and conclusions are presented in Section 4 and Section 5, respectively.
The following are some of the major findings of this study.
  • The heel effect is taken into account while calculating air kerma.
  • Calculating the air kerma by employing an artificial neural network and training it with a limited amount of data in varying angles, distances, and voltages of tubes.
  • Using an artificial neural network, the calculation of air kerma was executed extremely quickly and accurately compared to earlier efforts.
  • Calculating the air kerma for medical tubes’ operating voltage.

2. Methodology

As shown in Figure 1, the two main components of a medical X-ray CT imaging system are the X-ray tube and the detector. An X-ray tube’s electron filament (a thin wire) and metal target allow for the production of an X-ray image (the object the electrons hit). After being generated by the filament, electrons are propelled through a large potential difference in the X-ray source’s hoover chamber before striking the target. The Bremsstrahlung process converts just a small proportion of the energy in electrons into photons, therefore most of the energy ends up as heat. Several projections, or 2D pictures, are taken when the X-ray tube and detector spin around the subject at the same time. The system takes 2D photos of the patient and uses powerful computer technology to recreate 3D images of their body in accordance with Lambert Beer’s law. In the medical X-ray imaging sector, air kerma has only been studied using a model of an X-ray tube (as shown in Figure 2). A medical X-ray tube is simulated using code written in MCNPX. To model electron filaments, a tiny rectangular electron source was examined. If you want to simulate focal spots, you will need to use a surface source rather than a point source. A thin tungsten cube with a density of 19,290 kg/m3 was placed in a tubular vacuum chamber as an electron source target. The electron source–object axis of the simulation object has an angle of 20° to the vertical. It is important to note that at the maximum tilt angle of the X-ray tube target, the emitted X-rays leave the tube within the cone. To create the illusion of a hoover chamber, the electrons and the target are encased in a steel shell. The only section of the hoover chamber that has any action was the exposed circle. At the entrance to the vacuum chamber is a beryllium window with a density of 1850 kg/m3 and a thickness of 1 mm. Two-stage point detector counting was used to determine air kerma (tally F5). At each detector, the photon flux was first measured. The floating air kerma conversion factor recommended in the ICRP-51 report of the International Committee on Radiation Protection was used to determine the air kerma in the second stride [18]. It should be noted that the overall statistical uncertainty did not exceed 4% in all Monte Carlo simulations in this study. In this article, we employ a spherical coordinate system to precisely locate point detectors (according to the inherent spherical symmetry of the X-rays produced) at various tangent angles (0°, 2°, 4°, 6°, 8°, and 10°, point detectors were placed at 25, 50, 75, 100, and 125 mm from the source at 12°, 14°, 16°, 18°, and 20°, respectively) and polar angles (Φ = 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°, 90°, 105°, 120°, 135°, 150°, 165°, 180°, 195°, 210°, 225°, 240°, 255°, 270°, 285°, 350°, 330°, 345°, and 360°). The air kerma was calculated from the installed control points for tube voltages of 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, and 140 kV. Calculating the air kerma map for a given set of parameters required about 96 h when using a personal computer with an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU and 8GB RAM for Monte Carlo simulation.

GMDH Neural Network

In recent years, researchers have used mathematical models called artificial neural networks to help them understand how radiation interacts with tissue [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. Moreover, the strong mathematical tool of numerical computing [32,33,34,35,36,37,38] has been employed to solve various engineering challenges, most notably in the field of artificial networks [39,40,41,42,43,44]. One of the intelligent methods for solving complex and nonlinear problems was developed in 1968 by M.G. Ivakhnenko and named GMDH [45]. In fact, these algorithms create self-examination methods with prediction, classification, control synthesis, and system debugging capabilities. The characteristics of the network structure, including the number of layers, the number of important input features, and the ideal network configuration, were all detected automatically using Ivahnenko’s method. This method presumes that Kolmogorov–Gabor polynomials of higher order determine the system’s input and output equations.
y = a 0 + i = 1 m a i x i + i = 1 m j = 1 m a i j x i x j + i = 1 m j = 1 m k = 1 m a i j k x i x j x k +
x(x1, x2, …, xm) represents the input (the features vector), a(a1, a2, …, am) represents the coefficient or weight, and y(x) represents the network’s output. The following procedures should have been carried out in order to use a GMDH network:
In the first step, new variables should have been created and quadratic regression polynomials are calculated based on Equation (2) for each combination and two at a time for all characteristics (x1, x2…xm).
Z = c 1 + c 2 x i + c 3 x j + c 4 x i 2 + c 5 x j 2 + c 6 x i x j
Coefficient C was determined using the least squares method in this investigation. Take note of how each of the quadratic polynomials computed is quite close to the target value. A quadratic polynomial is calculated by each neuron. Secondly, dead neurons are those that could not accurately forecast the required product. The leftover neurons are employed for the layer-up procedure. This process not only creates the first neural layer, but also chooses the most effective neurons. The third phase involves using the polynomial found in the second stage to generate the next layer. This means that the old polynomial is used as a basis for creating a new polynomial, and the second step is repeated until an effective neuron is located. The GMDH neural network is not complete until this process is repeated several times. In the final stage, accuracy is guaranteed and test data are used to assess the efficiency of the designed network. Training data and test data are created throughout the neural network construction phases. The training data are used to create the neural network, and the error is minimized by tuning the network’s various parameters. After the training process is complete, the network’s effectiveness ought to be evaluated against data it has never seen before to ensure it has retained what it has learned. If this step is completed successfully, the network will behave as expected under operating circumstances. Around 70% of the data were used for training and the remaining 30% of the data were used for evaluation.

3. Results

For this research, the air kerma was calculated using a GMDH neural network. After extracting the function, it was fed into the network. For accurate air kerma estimation, the functions ϕ, θ, r, and V were found to be most useful. Figure 3 depicts the intended structure of the GMDH neural network.
The GMDH network took into consideration the voltage of the X-ray tube and the position inside the radiation field as inputs. Output was measured in kerma of air. A neural network was trained by randomly picking 5775 samples from the provided data. When training was complete, the remaining data was utilized to evaluate the neural network. Two hidden layers, each with 4 neurons, were able to give accurate correlations between inputs and outputs. Two error measures, mean relative error (MRE) and root mean square error (RMSE), were used to determine the discrepancy between the MCNP code’s air kerma volume and the neural network’s air kerma prediction. These requirements are represented by the following equations:
M R E % = 100 × 1 N j = 1 N X j E x p X j P r e d X j P r e d
R M S E = j = 1 N ( X j E x p X j P r e d ) 2 N 0.5
X(Exp) and X(Pred) are the experimental and predicted values, whereas N is the total number of samples.

4. Discussion

The air kerma, calculated using the Monte Carlo model, is shown in Figure 4 for two different tube voltages (60 kV and 120 kV) based on the X-ray field of view at a distance of 75 mm from the source. Figure 4a,b demonstrate how the heel effect of the X-ray tube causes the anticipated air kerma to be smaller on the right side of the field of view (towards the target) than on the left, despite being almost uniform from top to bottom. The kerma of the air increases as the voltage in the tube increases. To demonstrate the effect of distance, the air kerma is computed with the voltage held constant at 80 kV and the detector placed at distances of 500 mm and 1000 mm, respectively, in Figure 5a,b. Air kerma drops down dramatically with distance from the source, as predicted. This implies if the radiation source travels away from the treated region, the quantity of radiation that reaches that area goes lower.
Figure 6 exhibits two error histograms and regression plots on the training and testing data to visually emphasize the neural network’s performance. In the regression graph, the green circle represents the neural network’s prediction and the yellow line represents the optimal answer (the value of air kerma generated using the MCNP algorithm). These coincide, proving the network’s high precision. Some input and output data of the GMDH neural network are displayed in Table 1. In this table, some of the tube voltage values and the location that is considered inputs of the network can be seen, along with the amount of air kerma calculated by the MCNP code. In this table, you can see the performance of the neural network in finding the input–output relationship. It should be noted that for the best possible performance of the neural network, first the inputs and outputs are normalized, and then after predicting the output, the data are returned to their initial state. The amount of air kerma predicted by the neural network is also provided. As it is clear, the value predicted by the neural network has a slight difference from the calculated value, which indicates the acceptable performance of the neural network.

5. Conclusions

Calculating air kerma using the MCNP code is very time-consuming and applies a high volume of calculations to the system, which requires relatively powerful processors to simulate the radiation field and calculate air kerma. For this purpose, in this research, an attempt has been made to provide a quick and low calculation method for predicting this parameter by calculating air kerma at limited points. The MCNP algorithm and a neural network were used in this research to find the air kerma in the radiation field of the X-ray tube. This was accomplished by inspecting the X-ray tube at a voltage range of 40 to 140 kV. Data from 1375 points throughout the radiation field of the X-ray tube were analyzed to determine the air kerma at each voltage. The generated data matrix contains the 8250 columns (various samples) and four rows (three location attributes and X-ray voltage) needed to construct the neural network. Given the location and voltage of the X-ray tube, the supervised, fast-learning GMDH network was trained to forecast air kerma. The suggested model exhibited an MRE of less than 0.25% for predicting air kerma. Due to its excellent precision and speed, it is the most accurate approach for determining the air kerma in the radiation field of an X-ray tube. While the approach employed in this work was specifically focused on estimating air kerma for a particular X-ray tube design (fixed target angle of 20°), it may be utilized for a broad range of X-ray tube radiation fields. The suggested approach may also be used to calculate other radiation characteristics, such as absorbed dose.

Author Contributions

Methodology, L.Z., F.X., L.W., Y.C. and G.Z.; Investigation, E.N. and X.Z.; Writing—original draft, G.Z.; Supervision, L.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work is supported by the Research Foundation of Hangzhou Dianzi University (KYS335622091; KYH333122029M).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cember, H.; Johnson, T.E. Introduction to Health Physics; McGraw-Hill Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  2. Calibration of Radiation Protection. Monitoring Instruments; IAEA Safety Report No. 16; IAEA: Vienna, Austria, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  3. Miller, D.L.; Balter, S.; Schueler, B.A.; Wagner, L.K.; Strauss, K.J.; Vano, E. Clinical Radiation Management for Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures. Radiology 2010, 257, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Katoh, Y.; Mita, S.; Fukushi, M.; Nyui, Y.; Abe, S.; Kimura, J. Calculation of air-kerma rate of diagnostic X-ray generators. Radiol. Phys. Technol. 2011, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Oliveira, L.S.R.; Conti, C.C.; Amorim, A.S.; Balthar, M.C.V. NaI (Tl) scintillator detectors stripping procedure for air kerma measurements of diagnostic X-ray beams. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. 2013, 705, 106–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Porto, L.; Lunelli, N.; Paschuk, S.; Oliveira, A.; Ferreira, J.; Schelin, H.; Miguel, C.; Denyak, V.; Kmiecik, C.; Tilly, J.; et al. Evaluation of entrance surface air kerma in pediatric chest radiography. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2014, 104, 252–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Alonso, T.C.; Mourão Filho, A.P.; Da Silva, T.A. Measurements of air kerma index in computed tomography: A comparison among methodologies. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 2018, 138, 10–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Haba, T.; Koyama, S.; Aoyama, T.; Kinomura, Y.; Ida, Y.; Kobayashi, M.; Kameyama, H.; Tsutsumi, Y. Pin-photodiode array for the measurement of fan-beam energy and air kerma distributions of X-ray CT scanners. Phys. Medica 2016, 32, 905–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kwon, D.; Little, M.P.; Miller, D.L. Reference air kerma and kerma-area product as estimators of peak skin dose for fluoroscopically guided interventions. Med. Phys. 2011, 38, 4196–4204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Bushberg, J.T.; Seibert, J.A.; Leidholdt, E.M., Jr.; Boone, J.M. The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging, 3rd ed.; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  11. Perera, H.; Williamson, J.F.; Li, Z.; Mishra, V.; Meigooni, A.S. Dosimetric Characteristics, Air-Kerma Strength Calibration and Verification of Monte Carlo Simulation for a New Ytterbium-169 Brachytherapy Source. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1994, 28, 953–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Oliveira, C.; Salgado, J.; de Carvalho, A.F. Dose rate determinations in the Portuguese Gamma Irradiation Facility: Monte Carlo simulations and measurements. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2000, 58, 279–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Liu, Y.; Wei, B.; Zhuoa, R.; Wena, D.; Ding, D.; Xu, Y.; Mao, B. Determination of the Conventional True Value of Gamma-Ray Air Kerma in a Mini-type Reference Radiation. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 2016, 118, 238–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ounoughi, N.; Mavon, C.; Belafrites, A.; Fromm, M. Spatial distribution of air kerma rate and impact of accelerating voltage on the quality of an ultra soft X-ray beam generated by a cold cathode tube in air. Radiat. Meas. 2015, 80, 23–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mettivier, G.; Sarno, A.; Lai, Y.; Golosio, B.; Fanti, V.; Italiano, M.E.; Jia, X.; Russo, P. Virtual Clinical Trials in 2D and 3D X-ray Breast Imaging and Dosimetry: Comparison of CPU-Based and GPU-Based Monte Carlo Codes. Cancers 2022, 14, 1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nazemi, E.; Rokrok, B.; Movafeghi, A.; Dinca, M.; Kabir, M. Calculation of air kerma inside the radiation field of X-ray tube. Radiat. Meas. 2019, 124, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lu, Y.; Zheng, N.; Ye, M.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, G.; Nazemi, E.; He, J. Proposing Intelligent Approach to Predicting Air Kerma within Radiation Beams of Medical X-ray Imaging Systems. Diagnostics 2023, 13, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Data for Use in Protection against External Radiation; ICRP Publication 51; Pergamon Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  19. Nazemi, E.; Movafeghi, A.; Rokrok, B.; Dastjerdi, M.H.C. A novel method for predicting pixel value distribution non-uniformity due to heel effect of X-ray tube in industrial digital radiography using artificial neural network. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 2018, 38, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sattari, M.A.; Roshani, G.H.; Hanus, R.; Nazemi, E. Applicability of time-domain feature extraction methods and artificial intelligence in two-phase flow meters based on gamma-ray absorption technique. Measurement 2021, 168, 108474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sattari, M.A.; Roshani, G.H.; Hanus, R. Improving the structure of two-phase flow meter using feature extraction and GMDH neural network. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2020, 171, 108725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nazemi, E.; Feghhi, S.A.H.; Roshani, G.H. Void fraction prediction in two-phase flows independent of the liquid phase density changes. Radiat. Meas. 2014, 68, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Roshani, G.H.; Hanus, R.; Khazaei, A.; Zych, M.; Nazemi, E.; Mosorov, V. Density and velocity determination for single-phase flow based on radiotracer technique and neural networks. Flow Meas. Instrum. 2018, 61, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Roshani, G.H.; Nazemi, E.; Feghhi, S.A.H.; Setayeshi, S. Flow regime identification and void fraction prediction in two-phase flows based on gamma ray attenuation. Measurement 2015, 62, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Roshani, G.H.; Karami, A.; Nazemi, E. An intelligent integrated approach of Jaya optimization algorithm and neuro-fuzzy network to model the stratified three-phase flow of gas–oil–water. Comput. Appl. Math. 2019, 38, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Roshani, M.; Sattari, M.A.; Ali, P.J.M.; Roshani, G.H.; Nazemi, B.; Corniani, E.; Nazemi, E. Application of GMDH neural network technique to improve measuring precision of a simplified photon attenuation based two-phase flowmeter. Flow Meas. Instrum. 2020, 75, 101804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nazemi, E.; Roshani, G.H.; Feghhi, S.A.H.; Setayeshi, S.; Zadeh, E.E.; Fatehi, A. Optimization of a method for identifying the flow regime and measuring void fraction in a broad beam gamma-ray attenuation technique. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016, 41, 7438–7444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Roshani, G.H.; Feghhi, S.A.H.; Mahmoudi-Aznaveh, A.; Nazemi, E.; Adineh-Vand, A. Precise volume fraction prediction in oil–water–gas multiphase flows by means of gamma-ray attenuation and artificial neural networks using one detector. Measurement 2014, 51, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nazemi, E.; Feghhi, S.A.H.; Roshani, G.H.; Peyvandi, R.G.; Setayeshi, S. Precise Void Fraction Measurement in Two-Phase Flows Independent of the Flow Regime using gamma-ray attenuation. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2016, 48, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Balubaid, M.; Sattari, M.A.; Taylan, O.; Bakhsh, A.A.; Nazemi, E. Applications of discrete wavelet transform for feature extraction to increase the accuracy of monitoring systems of liquid petroleum products. Mathematics 2021, 9, 3215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hartman, E.J.; Keeler, J.D.; Kowalski, J.M. Layered neural networks with Gaussian hidden units as universal approxima-tors. Neural Comput. 1990, 2, 210–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lalbakhsh, A.; Mohamadpour, G.; Roshani, S.; Ami, M.; Roshani, S.; Sayem, A.S.M.; Alibakhshikenari, M.; Koziel, S. Design of a compact planar transmission line for miniaturized rat-race coupler with harmonics suppression. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 129207–129217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hookari, M.; Roshani, S.; Roshani, S. High-efficiency balanced power amplifier using miniaturized harmonics suppressed coupler. Int. J. RF Microw. Comput.-Aided Eng. 2020, 30, e22252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lotfi, S.; Roshani, S.; Roshani, S.; Gilan, M.S. Wilkinson power divider with band-pass filtering response and harmonics suppression using open and short stubs. Frequenz 2020, 74, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Jamshidi, M.; Siahkamari, H.; Roshani, S.; Roshani, S. A compact Gysel power divider design using U-shaped and T-shaped resonators with harmonics suppression. Electromagnetics 2019, 39, 491–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Khan, A.A.; Shaikh, Z.A.; Baitenova, L.; Mutaliyeva, L.; Moiseev, N.; Mikhaylov, A.; Laghari, A.A.; Idris, S.A.; Alshazly, H. QoS-ledger: Smart contracts and metaheuristic for secure quality-of-service and cost-efficient scheduling of medical-data processing. Electronics 2021, 10, 3083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Yumashev, A.; Mikhaylov, A. Development of polymer film coatings with high adhesion to steel alloys and high wear resistance. Polym. Compos. 2020, 41, 2875–2880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Alwaely, S.A.; Yousif, N.B.A.; Mikhaylov, A. Emotional development in preschoolers and socialization. Early Child Dev. Care 2020, 191, 2484–2493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Roshani, S.; Jamshidi, M.B.; Mohebi, F.; Roshani, S. Design and modeling of a compact power divider with squared resonators using artificial intelligence. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 117, 2085–2096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Roshani, S.; Azizian, J.; Roshani, S.; Jamshidi, M.B.; Parandin, F. Design of a miniaturized branch line microstrip coupler with a simple structure using artificial neural network. Frequenz 2022, 76, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Khaleghi, M.; Salimi, J.; Farhangi, V.; Moradi, M.J.; Karakouzian, M. Application of Artificial Neural Network to Predict Load Bearing Capacity and Stiffness of Perforated Masonry Walls. CivilEng 2021, 2, 48–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Dabiri, H.; Farhangi, V.; Moradi, M.J.; Zadehmohamad, M.; Karakouzian, M. Applications of Decision Tree and Random Forest as Tree-Based Machine Learning Techniques for Analyzing the Ultimate Strain of Spliced and Non-Spliced Reinforcement Bars. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 4851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hernandez, A.M.; Boone, J.M. Tungsten anode spectral model using interpolating cubic splines: Unfiltered X-ray spectra from 20 kV to 640 kV. Med. Phys. 2014, 41, 042101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Zhang, G.; Liu, R.; Ge, Y.; Mayet, A.M.; Chan, S.; Li, G.; Nazemi, E. Investigation on the Wilson Neuronal Model: Optimized Approximation and Digital Multiplierless Implementation. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Circuits Syst. 2022, 16, 1181–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ivakhnenko, A.G. Polynomial Theory of Complex Systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1971, SMC-1, 364e378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. A medical X-ray computed tomography imaging system: (1) X-ray tube, (2) conical X-ray beam, (3) patient, and (4) detector.
Figure 1. A medical X-ray computed tomography imaging system: (1) X-ray tube, (2) conical X-ray beam, (3) patient, and (4) detector.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g001
Figure 2. The X-ray tube: (1) shield, (2) electron filament, (3) target, (4) X-ray radiation beam, and (5) window.
Figure 2. The X-ray tube: (1) shield, (2) electron filament, (3) target, (4) X-ray radiation beam, and (5) window.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g002
Figure 3. The architecture of the proposed GMDH neural network.
Figure 3. The architecture of the proposed GMDH neural network.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g003
Figure 4. The air kerma determined with the help of the Monte Carlo method at (a) 60 kV and (b) 120 kV.
Figure 4. The air kerma determined with the help of the Monte Carlo method at (a) 60 kV and (b) 120 kV.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g004
Figure 5. The air kerma determined with the help of the Monte Carlo method at (a) 500 mm and (b) 1000 mm.
Figure 5. The air kerma determined with the help of the Monte Carlo method at (a) 500 mm and (b) 1000 mm.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g005
Figure 6. Diagram of the regression and error histograms for the: (a) training and (b) test datasets.
Figure 6. Diagram of the regression and error histograms for the: (a) training and (b) test datasets.
Diagnostics 13 01418 g006
Table 1. Some input and output data of the GMDH neural network.
Table 1. Some input and output data of the GMDH neural network.
ϕ (deg)θ (deg)R (mm)V (kV)Simulated Air Kerma (1 × e−5)Predicted Air Kerma (1 × e−5)
00250400.37300.3699
20250400.31900.3272
40250400.30400.2977
60250400.28500.2757
80250400.26300.2593
100250400.23700.2414
120250400.20600.2111
140250400.16800.1650
160250400.12200.1148
180250400.06480.0718
015500400.09320.0934
215500400.07990.0788
415500400.07610.0749
615500400.07170.0698
815500400.06670.0640
1015500400.06050.0598
1215500400.05300.0540
1415500400.04430.0426
1615500400.03350.0289
1815500400.02040.0194
2015500400.00190.0031
030750400.04140.0408
230750400.03500.0361
430750400.03350.0370
630750400.03180.0344
830750400.02980.0289
1030750400.02760.0253
1230750400.02480.0249
1430750400.02160.0244
1630750400.01790.0214
1830750400.01350.0165
2030750400.00850.0066
0451000400.02330.0204
2451000400.01980.0181
4451000400.01910.0189
6451000400.01840.0198
8451000400.01750.0189
10451000400.01660.0171
12451000400.01540.0160
14451000400.01420.0160
16451000400.01280.0161
18451000400.01110.0150
20451000400.00260.0104
0601250400.01490.0135
2601250400.01390.0116
4601250400.01360.0111
6601250400.01320.0122
8601250400.01280.0129
10601250400.01240.0121
12601250400.01190.0105
14601250400.01140.0096
16601250400.01090.0096
18601250400.01020.0084
20601250400.00950.0028
00250600.39900.3975
20250600.37800.3801
40250600.35300.3544
60250600.32400.3247
80250600.29300.2961
100250600.25800.2651
120250600.21800.2218
140250600.17300.1636
160250600.12200.1034
180250600.06540.0562
015500600.09980.0974
215500600.09480.0920
415500600.08850.0889
615500600.08180.0821
815500600.07430.0742
1015500600.06590.0673
1215500600.05640.0577
1415500600.04590.0415
1615500600.03390.0239
1815500600.02050.0141
2015500600.00420.0030
030750600.04440.0457
230750600.04270.0408
430750600.04020.0399
630750600.03750.0375
830750600.03450.0338
1030750600.03110.0312
1230750600.02740.0293
1430750600.02330.0250
1630750600.01880.0182
1830750600.01380.0122
2030750600.00840.0047
0451000600.02500.0285
2451000600.02430.0247
4451000600.02310.0215
6451000600.02190.0205
8451000600.02060.0206
10451000600.01910.0208
12451000600.01760.0201
14451000600.01580.0182
16451000600.01390.0152
18451000600.01190.0121
20451000600.00400.0079
0601250600.01600.0154
2601250600.01580.0177
4601250600.01530.0163
6601250600.01470.0149
8601250600.01420.0143
10601250600.01350.0136
12601250600.01290.0124
14601250600.01210.0112
16601250600.01140.0106
18601250600.01050.0100
20601250600.00960.0077
00250800.41300.4087
20250800.40700.4051
40250800.37500.3739
60250800.34100.3326
80250800.30400.2938
100250800.26300.2587
120250800.21900.2180
140250800.17100.1641
160250800.12000.1029
180250800.06450.0490
015500800.10300.1027
215500800.10200.1040
415500800.09420.0983
615500800.08610.0862
815500800.07720.0732
1015500800.06750.0633
1215500800.05700.0546
1415500800.04560.0423
1615500800.03330.0278
1815500800.02020.0183
2015500800.00610.0082
030750800.04590.0453
230750800.04620.0443
430750800.04310.0445
630750800.03980.0423
830750800.03620.0372
1030750800.03230.0315
1230750800.02810.0266
1430750800.02360.0217
1630750800.01870.0170
1830750800.01360.0144
2030750800.00820.0094
0451000800.02580.0274
2451000800.02630.0254
4451000800.02490.0232
6451000800.02340.0229
8451000800.02180.0231
10451000800.02010.0219
12451000800.01830.0191
14451000800.01620.0155
16451000800.01410.0129
18451000800.01190.0119
20451000800.00540.0090
0601250800.01650.0154
2601250800.01670.0183
4601250800.01610.0173
6601250800.01540.0160
8601250800.01470.0151
10601250800.01400.0141
12601250800.01320.0124
14601250800.01230.0109
16601250800.01140.0106
18601250800.01050.0109
20601250800.00940.0094
002501000.43200.4285
202501000.42600.4248
402501000.39100.3876
602501000.35300.3424
802501000.31200.3028
1002501000.26800.2694
1202501000.22200.2328
1402501000.17200.1816
1602501000.12000.1156
1802501000.06570.0503
0155001000.10800.1099
2155001000.10700.1105
4155001000.09820.1016
6155001000.08910.0888
8155001000.07930.0762
10155001000.06880.0668
12155001000.05770.0593
14155001000.04590.0487
16155001000.03340.0332
18155001000.02030.0186
20155001000.00750.0073
0307501000.04800.0437
2307501000.04820.0445
4307501000.04470.0450
6307501000.04100.0437
8307501000.03710.0388
10307501000.03280.0320
12307501000.02840.0258
14307501000.02370.0209
16307501000.01870.0173
18307501000.01350.0153
20307501000.00810.0100
04510001000.02700.0264
24510001000.02750.0262
44510001000.02590.0247
64510001000.02420.0243
84510001000.02240.0237
104510001000.02050.0214
124510001000.01850.0176
144510001000.01640.0140
164510001000.01420.0126
184510001000.01190.0129
204510001000.00690.0094
06012501000.01730.0179
26012501000.01750.0195
46012501000.01680.0192
66012501000.01600.0181
86012501000.01520.0166
106012501000.01440.0147
126012501000.01350.0127
146012501000.01250.0115
166012501000.01150.0116
186012501000.01050.0119
206012501000.00950.0083
002501200.44900.4500
202501200.43500.4375
402501200.39700.3968
602501200.35800.3535
802501200.31500.3137
1002501200.27000.2756
1202501200.22300.2338
1402501200.17300.1809
1602501200.12200.1145
1802501200.06740.0488
0155001200.11200.1165
2155001200.10900.1112
4155001200.10000.1001
6155001200.09040.0903
8155001200.08020.0805
10155001200.06940.0700
12155001200.05800.0589
14155001200.04620.0453
16155001200.03370.0277
18155001200.02070.0108
20155001200.00880.0034
0307501200.04990.0468
2307501200.04870.0462
4307501200.04510.0447
6307501200.04120.0440
8307501200.03710.0414
10307501200.03280.0360
12307501200.02830.0295
14307501200.02360.0231
16307501200.01860.0175
18307501200.01350.0133
20307501200.00820.0080
04510001200.02800.0285
24510001200.02780.0285
44510001200.02610.0254
64510001200.02430.0234
84510001200.02240.0228
104510001200.02050.0222
124510001200.01850.0204
144510001200.01630.0174
164510001200.01410.0146
184510001200.01180.0126
204510001200.00850.0071
06012501200.01790.0190
26012501200.01800.0180
46012501200.01720.0178
66012501200.01630.0168
86012501200.01550.0153
106012501200.01460.0139
126012501200.01360.0130
146012501200.01270.0125
166012501200.01170.0122
186012501200.01060.0110
206012501200.00950.0057
002501400.46100.4537
202501400.43900.4354
402501400.40000.3975
602501400.35900.3586
802501400.31600.3161
1002501400.27100.2689
1202501400.22400.2218
1402501400.17500.1763
1602501400.12400.1262
1802501400.06970.0725
0155001400.11500.1178
2155001400.11000.1099
4155001400.10100.0996
6155001400.09070.0931
8155001400.08050.0840
10155001400.06970.0697
12155001400.05830.0548
14155001400.04670.0430
16155001400.03430.0321
18155001400.02130.0201
20155001400.00990.0121
0307501400.05130.0496
2307501400.04860.0492
4307501400.04490.0455
6307501400.04100.0439
8307501400.03680.0420
10307501400.03250.0376
12307501400.02800.0312
14307501400.02340.0249
16307501400.01860.0197
18307501400.01370.0165
20307501400.00850.0130
04510001400.02880.0273
24510001400.02770.0282
44510001400.02600.0231
64510001400.02420.0191
84510001400.02220.0188
104510001400.02030.0208
124510001400.01830.0214
144510001400.01620.0184
164510001400.01400.0133
184510001400.01180.0098
204510001400.01000.0072
06012501400.01850.0190
26012501400.01830.0162
46012501400.01740.0165
66012501400.01660.0161
86012501400.01570.0151
106012501400.01470.0148
126012501400.01380.0147
146012501400.01280.0137
166012501400.01180.0120
186012501400.01070.0111
206012501400.00970.0109
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, L.; Xu, F.; Wang, L.; Chen, Y.; Nazemi, E.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, X. Air Kerma Calculation in Diagnostic Medical Imaging Devices Using Group Method of Data Handling Network. Diagnostics 2023, 13, 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081418

AMA Style

Zhang L, Xu F, Wang L, Chen Y, Nazemi E, Zhang G, Zhang X. Air Kerma Calculation in Diagnostic Medical Imaging Devices Using Group Method of Data Handling Network. Diagnostics. 2023; 13(8):1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081418

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Licheng, Fengzhe Xu, Lubing Wang, Yunkui Chen, Ehsan Nazemi, Guohua Zhang, and Xicai Zhang. 2023. "Air Kerma Calculation in Diagnostic Medical Imaging Devices Using Group Method of Data Handling Network" Diagnostics 13, no. 8: 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081418

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop