. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Oct 1.

Published in final edited form as: IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec (1997). 2009 Oct 24;2009:3900–3903. doi: 10.1109/NSSMIC.2009.5401929

Table. 2.

Comparison with 2-meter scanner simulation by Poon, et al [5]. Several differences for the simulated models in these two studies are outlined in the text above. The two different simulated phantom diameters by Poon, et al. (20-cm and 35-cm) straddle the 27-cm-diameter phantom used for our study. For the purpose of this comparison, we use a scan-time activity of 407 MBq. As is suggested in [5], maximum ring difference was selected for 90% peak NEC at this activity.

	Units	Poon ∅20cm	Poon ∅35cm	54-block ∅27cm
maxRD	cm	58.2	47.4	39.8
Triggered singles	Mcps	657	587	369
Prompts (P)	Mcps	31.6	15.2	13.3
90% peak NEC	Mcps	6.53	1.15	1.08
Scatter fraction (S/(T+S))	%	30	45	47
Randoms fraction (R/(T+R)	%	42	58	61