{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03622735790131168, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016239850093691444, 'mean_word_length': 4.448979591836735, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?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}}
Evaluation of detector dynamic range in the x-ray exposure domain in mammography: a comparison between film-screen and flat panel detector systems.

Digital detectors in mammography have wide dynamic range in addition to the benefit of decoupled acquisition and display. How wide the dynamic range is and how it compares to film-screen systems in the clinical x-ray exposure domain are unclear. In this work, we compare the effective dynamic ranges of film-screen and flat panel mammography systems, along with the dynamic ranges of their component image receptors in the clinical x-ray exposure domain. An ACR mammography phantom was imaged using variable mAs (exposure) values for both systems. The dynamic range of the contrast-limited film-screen system was defined as that ratio of mAs (exposure) values for a 26 kVp Mo/Mo (HVL=0.34 mm Al) beam that yielded passing phantom scores. The same approach was done for the noise-limited digital system. Data from three independent observers delineated a useful phantom background optical density range of 1.27 to 2.63, which corresponded to a dynamic range of 2.3 +/- 0.53. The digital system had a dynamic range of 9.9 +/- 1.8, which was wider than the film-screen system (p<0.02). The dynamic range of the film-screen system was limited by the dynamic range of the film. The digital detector, on the other hand, had an estimated dynamic range of 42, which was wider than the dynamic range of the digital system in its entirety by a factor of 4. The generator/tube combination was the limiting factor in determining the digital system's dynamic range.