[Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs (PETscanner "level5" is NOT working)

Wed Mar 11 16:43:15 CET 2020

Greetings,

The documentation claim that this policy is applied relative to a "crystal" component. Since PetScanner configuration do not possess that component, it make sense that it will not work. When in doupt, the code can't(Most of the time) lie. In [1], you can see that the "crystal" component is required. I have no idea why, however.

Also, i am not sure I understand the following: "Basically, what I am trying to achieve is to measure the location of each crystal center since each crystal is coupled to a single readout PMT/readout channel in my design." You want to know the spatial position of your crystals?

Have a nice day,
Maxime Toussaint

[1] https://github.com/OpenGATE/Gate/blob/f2d9a5e19d568c71fe11b64a05d4f6037a208841/source/digits_hits/src/GateReadout.cc

________________________________
De : Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu>
Envoyé : 9 mars 2020 20:34
À : 강한규 <lovehangulp at naver.com>; Maxime Toussaint <Maxime.Toussaint at USherbrooke.ca>
Cc : gate-users <gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>
Objet : Re: [Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs (PETscanner "level5" is NOT working)

A follow-up question, does PETScanner work with TakeEnergyCentroid policy?

In my simulation using the PETScanner system, everything works fine and it has been validated to a certain degree. However, soon as I switched to TakeEnergyCentroid policy, no matter what the readout depth is, the core dumped. The error message is shown in the screenshot below. According to the error message, it looks like it was trying to find the system component "crystal", however, "crystal" is not defined in the PETScanner/scanner as shown in its hierarchy below.

Basically, what I am trying to achieve is to measure the location of each crystal center since each crystal is coupled to a single readout PMT/readout channel in my design. The way I can think of is setting the readout depth to crystal level and using TakeEnergyCentroid policy, however, it crashes in the PETScanner system.

Any suggestions? Is PETScanner compatible with akeEnergyCentroid policy? Or I have messed something up.

Thank you very much for help.

Zhengzhi

On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 2:48 PM Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu<mailto:zliu36 at stanford.edu>> wrote:
Dr. Han Gyu,

Thank you for your detailed explanation and for showing us your excellent work. You have been a great help to many GATE users (like me) in this community.
Thank you very much and look forward to meeting you in person in future conferences.

Sincerely,
Zhengzhi

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 10:25 PM 강한규 <lovehangulp at naver.com<mailto:lovehangulp at naver.com>> wrote:

Dear Zhengzhi and Maxime,

Recently, I have been busy so I was not able to answer your questions.

I also experienced that the "level5" is NOT working for "PETscanner" in GATEv6.2.(slide#3-4)

The solution was to attach the "layer1" to the 4th layer crystal as Maxime mentioned.

Attached is my work about GATEv6.2 simulation for staggered 4-layer DOI PET scanner.

[cid:170b72d4734a87ef7d24]

After GATE simulation and image reconstruction, I obtained the PET image successfully.(slide#5-11)

The GATE output and crystal ID information are summarized.(slide#12-18)

By the way, if you want more layers, then you can use just "genericRepeater".

In doing so you can place the crystal array whatever you like.

In this case, you need two system attachments as below.

-level1 (for PET block)

-level2 (for crystal with genericRepeater)

Hopefully, my answer would be helpful for your works.

Best regards,

Han Gyu

--------Han Gyu Kang, Ph.D, Researcher

National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS)
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (QST)
 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, JAPAN

-----Original Message-----
From: "Maxime Toussaint"<Maxime.Toussaint at USherbrooke.ca>
To: "gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>"<gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>>;
Cc:
Sent: 2020-03-07 (토) 12:46:38 (GMT+09:00)
Subject: Re: [Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs

Greetings,

Sorry, I explained myself poorly. level1 to level4 are okay. What I meant was to change level5 to either layer0 or layer1.

Bests,
Maxime Toussaint
________________________________
De : Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu<mailto:zliu36 at stanford.edu>>
Envoyé : 6 mars 2020 22:39
À : Maxime Toussaint <Maxime.Toussaint at USherbrooke.ca>
Objet : Re: [Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs

Hi Maxime,

Thank you very much as well. I tried your suggestion of replacing level1 to level5 with layer0 to layer4 in PETScaner. It failed at layer2 and does not allow me to add layer2 and later layers. It worked fine with 2layers. Could you please verify this with your code by adding some simple dummy layers to your code?
Here is the errormsg:
[Screenshot from 2020-03-06 19-37-02.png]

Thank you very much sincerely.

Zhengzhi

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 7:04 PM Maxime Toussaint <Maxime.Toussaint at usherbrooke.ca<mailto:Maxime.Toussaint at usherbrooke.ca>> wrote:
Greetings,

I quickly looked at the code and I think I found the problem. In short, the documentation is correct for the current version of the Gate code on github but not for Gate 8.2.

If we look at [1], we see that a change was made from having PETscanner/scanner system with components called layer0/layer1 to one called level5. That change was committed the 9th of May 2019 while Gate 8.2 seems to be a Februray 2019 version of the code.

I tried using layer0 (and later layer1) and Gate did not produce any warning nor bug. Note that this does not prove that the resulting system work.

Also, "PETscanner" is a valid system definition. I will propose a modification of the table 1.2 to make it more explicit.

This situation does highlight a little problem. From my understanding, the current version of the user guide follow the code on github but it is also used for the current stable version of Gate (8.2 at the moment). If I am correct, I would propose that a version of the user guide, extracted at the same time as the official version, be saved separately from the "latest" and a note added saying something like "correction to the user guide are only applied on the latest version". After all, we can't expect anyone to adapt all versions of the user guide each time the user guide is enhanced.

Hope that I could help and have a nice day,
Maxime Toussaint

[1] https://github.com/OpenGATE/Gate/blame/cbe7ffb1c3222b5c1801eb7bc8b703253540e6b1/source/geometry/src/GateScannerSystem.cc<https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FOpenGATE%2FGate%2Fblame%2Fcbe7ffb1c3222b5c1801eb7bc8b703253540e6b1%2Fsource%2Fgeometry%2Fsrc%2FGateScannerSystem.cc&data=02%7C01%7CMaxime.Toussaint%40usherbrooke.ca%7C7c194e0ad8b8458980d208d7c48ae8d6%7C3a5a8744593545f99423b32c3a5de082%7C0%7C0%7C637193973212126017&sdata=L%2B6wmzXNj%2BY5CEAxtwyT9T5QLqOgteVaFv3O%2FhIfdcA%3D&reserved=0>
________________________________
De : Gate-users <gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>> de la part de Matthew Strugari <matthew.strugari at dal.ca<mailto:matthew.strugari at dal.ca>>
Envoyé : 6 mars 2020 20:57
À : Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu<mailto:zliu36 at stanford.edu>>; gate-users <gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>>
Objet : Re: [Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs

Hi Zhengzhi,

According to the user manual (Section 1.5.1 https://opengate.readthedocs.io/en/latest/defining_a_system_scanner_ct_pet_spect_optical.html#defining-the-systems<https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopengate.readthedocs.io%2Fen%2Flatest%2Fdefining_a_system_scanner_ct_pet_spect_optical.html%23defining-the-systems&data=02%7C01%7CMaxime.Toussaint%40usherbrooke.ca%7C7c194e0ad8b8458980d208d7c48ae8d6%7C3a5a8744593545f99423b32c3a5de082%7C0%7C0%7C637193973212126017&sdata=pKVc7m0txcRWujIUCIAbhUzqmwyonTNuM9ToKD7MbFo%3D&reserved=0>), the system name must be one of those available in Table 1.1. In the image you provided, this would be Table 4.1. I’m not sure which version of the user manual you are referring to, but the most up to date information can be found on readthedocs. Nonetheless, your error of COMMAND NOT FOUND shows that you defined the system name to be PETscanner which is not a valid system name. Replace “PETscanner” with “scanner” and you should be able to assign level5 with the defined functionality.

Regards,

Matthew

From: Gate-users <gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>> on behalf of Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu<mailto:zliu36 at stanford.edu>>
Date: Friday, March 6, 2020 at 7:30 PM
To: gate-users <gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>>
Subject: Re: [Gate-users] Report of GATEv8.2 bugs

According to the user manual, 5 levels can be attached. However, I am not able to attach any 5th level. Please share your thoughts if you have some experience.  Thanks a lot.

[cid:170b72d47334cff311]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:17 PM Zhengzhi Liu <zliu36 at stanford.edu<mailto:zliu36 at stanford.edu>> wrote:

Report of a potential bug:

It looks PETScanner only allows 4 layers to be attached, whenever I tried to attach the 5th layer (no matter what the geometry is), it throws the errormsg.  Has anyone been able to attach a 5 level to PETScanner?  My understanding is Gate doesn't recognize the keyword level5.

[cid:170b72d47335b16b22]

Thanks for reading.

Sincere greetings,

Zhengzhi

_______________________________________________
Gate-users mailing list
Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org<mailto:Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>
http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/mailman/listinfo/gate-users<https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.opengatecollaboration.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgate-users&data=02%7C01%7CMaxime.Toussaint%40usherbrooke.ca%7C7c194e0ad8b8458980d208d7c48ae8d6%7C3a5a8744593545f99423b32c3a5de082%7C0%7C0%7C637193973212136013&sdata=vQ23ttE5IYM8ViHLXNUhFoT4ehhxAg3qkBkA3Gnubbg%3D&reserved=0>
[https://mail.naver.com/readReceipt/notify/?img=flRC1zkrWrmYaXIn%2B6%2B5FrtrKru%2FaxbmMouXKobqM4uZM63SaAuZKotwF6MdtzFXp6UmKxg5W4d5W4pZMLlGWq%2FsD4wG%2BxKrtHFdM6l4WXiv74kv%2Bt%3D%3D.gif]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20200311/6a0d1e14/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 110290 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20200311/6a0d1e14/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 75696 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20200311/6a0d1e14/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screenshot from 2020-03-06 19-37-02.png
Type: image/png
Size: 62507 bytes
Desc: Screenshot from 2020-03-06 19-37-02.png
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20200311/6a0d1e14/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1583560761537.png
Type: image/png
Size: 193277 bytes
Desc: 1583560761537.png
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20200311/6a0d1e14/attachment-0007.png>