货物检验系统中材料鉴别方法的统计评价

IF 2.8 3区 物理与天体物理 Q3 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL
Hossein Barati , Seyed AmirHossein Feghhi , Rouhollah Azimirad
{"title":"货物检验系统中材料鉴别方法的统计评价","authors":"Hossein Barati ,&nbsp;Seyed AmirHossein Feghhi ,&nbsp;Rouhollah Azimirad","doi":"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In X-ray inspection systems employing dual-energy capabilities, material discrimination primarily centers on three methodologies based on curves: the <span><math><mi>α</mi></math></span> curve, the <span><math><mi>R</mi></math></span> curve, and the <span><math><mrow><mi>H</mi><mo>−</mo><mi>L</mi></mrow></math></span> curve. Despite extensive research in this field, there remains ambiguity regarding the comparative effectiveness of these methods under different conditions. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of material discrimination using a standard cargo inspection system for four wedge-shaped materials. Multiple experiments were conducted, where experimental data were mapped onto the coordinate system for all three discrimination methods, and discrimination curves were generated using cubic interpolation. Regular residual analysis and statistical tests, including ANOVA and Tukey HSD, were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the <span><math><mi>R</mi></math></span>, <span><math><mi>α</mi></math></span>, and <span><math><mrow><mi>H</mi><mo>−</mo><mi>L</mi></mrow></math></span> methods. No statistically significant differences in the performance of these methods were found. Unlike some previous studies where one method was favored over another, no inherent superiority of any particular method was observed in this research. Additionally, combining these methods yields no significant gains in accuracy or efficiency, and their simultaneous use is not recommended due to increased computational costs. The analysis of sample thickness effects revealed higher success rates for thicker samples, though no method outperformed the others across thickness ranges. These findings suggest that the choice of method should be guided by practical considerations rather than assumptions of inherent superiority.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20861,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","volume":"236 ","pages":"Article 112873"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A statistical evaluation of material discrimination approaches in cargo inspection systems\",\"authors\":\"Hossein Barati ,&nbsp;Seyed AmirHossein Feghhi ,&nbsp;Rouhollah Azimirad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In X-ray inspection systems employing dual-energy capabilities, material discrimination primarily centers on three methodologies based on curves: the <span><math><mi>α</mi></math></span> curve, the <span><math><mi>R</mi></math></span> curve, and the <span><math><mrow><mi>H</mi><mo>−</mo><mi>L</mi></mrow></math></span> curve. Despite extensive research in this field, there remains ambiguity regarding the comparative effectiveness of these methods under different conditions. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of material discrimination using a standard cargo inspection system for four wedge-shaped materials. Multiple experiments were conducted, where experimental data were mapped onto the coordinate system for all three discrimination methods, and discrimination curves were generated using cubic interpolation. Regular residual analysis and statistical tests, including ANOVA and Tukey HSD, were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the <span><math><mi>R</mi></math></span>, <span><math><mi>α</mi></math></span>, and <span><math><mrow><mi>H</mi><mo>−</mo><mi>L</mi></mrow></math></span> methods. No statistically significant differences in the performance of these methods were found. Unlike some previous studies where one method was favored over another, no inherent superiority of any particular method was observed in this research. Additionally, combining these methods yields no significant gains in accuracy or efficiency, and their simultaneous use is not recommended due to increased computational costs. The analysis of sample thickness effects revealed higher success rates for thicker samples, though no method outperformed the others across thickness ranges. These findings suggest that the choice of method should be guided by practical considerations rather than assumptions of inherent superiority.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"236 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112873\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969806X25003652\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969806X25003652","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在采用双能能力的x射线检测系统中,材料识别主要集中在三种基于曲线的方法上:α曲线、R曲线和H - L曲线。尽管在这一领域进行了广泛的研究,但这些方法在不同条件下的比较有效性仍然存在歧义。本研究旨在评估使用四种楔形材料的标准货物检验系统的材料判别的准确性。进行了多次实验,将实验数据映射到三种识别方法的坐标系中,并使用三次插值生成识别曲线。采用常规残差分析和统计检验(包括方差分析和Tukey HSD)来评价R、α和H−L方法的有效性。在这些方法的性能上没有发现统计学上的显著差异。与以前的一些研究不同,一种方法比另一种方法更受青睐,在这项研究中没有观察到任何特定方法的固有优势。此外,结合使用这些方法在准确性或效率方面没有显著的提高,并且由于计算成本的增加,不建议同时使用它们。样品厚度效应的分析显示,较厚的样品成功率更高,尽管没有一种方法在厚度范围内优于其他方法。这些发现表明,方法的选择应以实际考虑为指导,而不是假设固有的优越性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A statistical evaluation of material discrimination approaches in cargo inspection systems
In X-ray inspection systems employing dual-energy capabilities, material discrimination primarily centers on three methodologies based on curves: the α curve, the R curve, and the HL curve. Despite extensive research in this field, there remains ambiguity regarding the comparative effectiveness of these methods under different conditions. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of material discrimination using a standard cargo inspection system for four wedge-shaped materials. Multiple experiments were conducted, where experimental data were mapped onto the coordinate system for all three discrimination methods, and discrimination curves were generated using cubic interpolation. Regular residual analysis and statistical tests, including ANOVA and Tukey HSD, were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the R, α, and HL methods. No statistically significant differences in the performance of these methods were found. Unlike some previous studies where one method was favored over another, no inherent superiority of any particular method was observed in this research. Additionally, combining these methods yields no significant gains in accuracy or efficiency, and their simultaneous use is not recommended due to increased computational costs. The analysis of sample thickness effects revealed higher success rates for thicker samples, though no method outperformed the others across thickness ranges. These findings suggest that the choice of method should be guided by practical considerations rather than assumptions of inherent superiority.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Radiation Physics and Chemistry
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 化学-核科学技术
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
17.20%
发文量
574
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Radiation Physics and Chemistry is a multidisciplinary journal that provides a medium for publication of substantial and original papers, reviews, and short communications which focus on research and developments involving ionizing radiation in radiation physics, radiation chemistry and radiation processing. The journal aims to publish papers with significance to an international audience, containing substantial novelty and scientific impact. The Editors reserve the rights to reject, with or without external review, papers that do not meet these criteria. This could include papers that are very similar to previous publications, only with changed target substrates, employed materials, analyzed sites and experimental methods, report results without presenting new insights and/or hypothesis testing, or do not focus on the radiation effects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信