The accomplishment of the Engineering Design Activities of IFMIF/EVEDA: The European Japanese project towards a Li(d,xn) fusion relevant neutron source
Authors:
J. Knaster,
A. Ibarra,
J. Abal,
A. Abou Sena,
F. Arbeiter,
F. Arranz,
J. M. Arroyo,
E. Bargallo,
P. Y. Beauvais,
D. Bernardi,
N. Casal,
J. M. Carmona,
N. Chauvin,
M. Comunian,
O. Delferriere,
A. Delgado,
P. Diaz Arocas,
U. Fischer,
M. Frisoni,
A. Garcia,
P. Garin,
R. Gobin,
P. Gouat,
F. Groesche,
R. Heidinger
, et al. (42 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
The International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF), presently in its Engineering Validation and Engineering Design Activities (EVEDA) phase under the frame of the Broader Approach Agreement between Europe and Japan, accomplished in summer 2013, on schedule, its EDA phase with the release of the engineering design report of the IFMIF plant, which is here described. Many improvements of…
▽ More
The International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF), presently in its Engineering Validation and Engineering Design Activities (EVEDA) phase under the frame of the Broader Approach Agreement between Europe and Japan, accomplished in summer 2013, on schedule, its EDA phase with the release of the engineering design report of the IFMIF plant, which is here described. Many improvements of the design from former phases are implemented, particularly a reduction of beam losses and operational costs thanks to the superconducting accelerator concept, the re-location of the quench tank outside the test cell (TC) with a reduction of tritium inventory and a simplification on its replacement in case of failure, the separation of the irradiation modules from the shielding block gaining irradiation flexibility and enhancement of the remote handling equipment reliability and cost reduction, and the water cooling of the liner and biological shielding of the TC, enhancing the efficiency and economy of the related sub-systems. In addition, the maintenance strategy has been modified to allow a shorter yearly stop of the irradiation operations and a more careful management of the irradiated samples. The design of the IFMIF plant is intimately linked with the EVA phase carried out since the entry into force of IFMIF/EVEDA in June 2007.
△ Less
Submitted 28 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset
Authors:
Daniela Sacchetto,
Lia Morra,
Silvano Agliozzo,
Daniela Bernardi,
Tomas Bjorklund,
Beniamino Brancato,
Patrizia Bravetti,
Luca A. Carbonaro,
Loredana Correale,
Carmen Fantò,
Elisabetta Favettini,
Laura Martincich,
Luisella Milanesio,
Sara Mombelloni,
Francesco Monetti,
Doralba Morrone,
Marco Pellegrini,
Barbara Pesce,
Antonella Petrillo,
Gianni Saguatti,
Carmen Stevanin,
Rubina M. Trimboli,
Paola Tuttobene,
Marvi Valentini,
Vincenzo Marra
, et al. (3 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset.
Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from 9 centers and 6 different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were…
▽ More
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset.
Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from 9 centers and 6 different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. Panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (k) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification.
Results: While the agreement of individual radiologists with PMR ranged from k=0.483 to k=0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92%). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (k=0.620, standard deviation [SD]=0.140), individual versus PMR (k=0.736, SD=0.117), and individual versus ABDE (k=0.674, SD=0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (k=0.831).
Conclusions: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation.
△ Less
Submitted 13 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
