Initial results of applying automatic channel fault detection and diagnosis on small animal APD-based digital PET scanners

Optimal image quality in small animal positron emission tomography (PET) is critical to ensure accuracy and reliability of results obtained in biological studies. Indeed, unstable image quality over time can jeopardize longitudinal studies. This is why quality control (QC) procedures are of the utmost importance in order to keep PET scanners at an optimal performance level. Unfortunately, as the scanner technology evolves increasing the number of acquisition channels, so does the scanner operator's effort to keep up with adequate QC procedures. With scanners using one-to-one crystal to photodetector coupling to achieve enhanced spatial resolution and contrast to noise ratio (CNR), the QC workload rapidly increases to unmanageable levels due to the number of independent channels involved. An intelligent system (IS) was proposed to help reduce the QC workload by performing automatic channel fault detection and diagnosis. The IS consists of four high-level modules that employ machine learning methods to perform their tasks: Parameter extraction, Fault detection, Fault prioritization and Fault diagnosis. Ultimately, the IS presents a prioritized list to the operator containing the faulty channels and proposes actions that should be taken to correct them. To validate that the IS can perform QC procedures with minimal operator intervention, it was deployed on a LabPET™ scanner in Sherbrooke and image quality metrics were extracted before and after the channel corrections proposed by the IS where applied. After a single iteration of corrections on sub-optimal scanner settings, a 6.3 % increase in the CNR was observed as well as a 7.0 % decrease of the uniformity percentage standard deviation. These results indicate that the IS can improve scanner performance and further iterations are expected to make the scanner converge towards optimal settings.

[1]  H. N. Kim,et al.  The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC , 2003 .

[2]  R Matheoud,et al.  Five-year experience of quality control for a 3D LSO-based whole-body PET scanner: results and considerations. , 2012, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[3]  R. Fontaine,et al.  Imaging performance of LabPET APD-based digital PET scanners for pre-clinical research , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  Z. L. Matthews,et al.  The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC , 2008 .

[5]  Roger Lecomte,et al.  Automatic channel fault detection and diagnosis system for a small animal APD-based digital PET scanner , 2014, 2014 19th IEEE-NPSS Real Time Conference.

[6]  R. Fontaine,et al.  Automatic Channel Fault Detection on a Small Animal APD-Based Digital PET Scanner , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[7]  A. Kazarov,et al.  Use of Expert system and Data Analysis Technologies in automation of error detection, diagnosis and recovery for ATLAS Trigger-DAQ Control framework , 2012, 2012 18th IEEE-NPSS Real Time Conference.

[8]  R. Fontaine,et al.  Performance evaluation of the LabPET™ APD-based digital PET scanner , 2009, 2007 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[9]  R. Fontaine,et al.  The Hardware and Signal Processing Architecture of LabPET™, a Small Animal APD-Based Digital PET Scanner , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[10]  I. Sgura,et al.  The ALICE-HMPID Detector Control System: Its evolution towards an expert and adaptive system , 2011 .

[11]  A. Goshaw The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider , 2008 .

[12]  G. Aad,et al.  The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collide , 2008 .