{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01855287569573284, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006493506493506494, 'mean_word_length': 5.4226190476190474, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effective sensitivity in 3D PET: the impact of detector dead time on 3D system performance

3D PET has higher sensitivity than 2D PET. Sensitivity is determined by two components: the geometric solid angle for detection, and the fractional dead time, i.e., the time for which the detector is unavailable for accepting events. The loss in overall sensitivity as a function of radioactivity concentration due to these factors for 3D PET has been characterised by a parameter, the effective sensitivity, which combines absolute sensitivity and noise equivalent count rates. This parameter includes scatter, system sensitivity, dead time, and random coincidence rates, and permits comparisons between different tomographs as well as the same tomograph under different conditions. Effective sensitivity decreases most rapidly for larger, open 3D tomographs. The loss in effective sensitivity with increasing count rate suggests that new faster scintillation detectors will be needed to realize the sensitivity gain of 3D PET over a wide dynamic range of radioactivity concentrations.