• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.57 no.3
• /
• pp.24-35
• /
• 2024

Recently, research using deep learning technologies such as artificial intelligence, convolutional neural networks, etc. has been actively conducted in various fields including healthcare, manufacturing, autonomous driving, and security, and is having a significant influence on society. In line with this trend, the present study attempted to apply deep learning to the classification of archaeological artifacts, specifically ancient Korean roof-end tiles. Using 100 images of roof-end tiles from each of the Goguryeo, Baekje, and Silla dynasties, for a total of 300 base images, a dataset was formed and expanded to 1,200 images using data augmentation techniques. After building a model using transfer learning from the pre-trained EfficientNetB0 model and conducting five-fold cross-validation, an average training accuracy of 98.06% and validation accuracy of 97.08% were achieved. Furthermore, when model performance was evaluated with a test dataset of 240 images, it could classify the roof-end tile images from the three dynasties with a minimum accuracy of 91%. In particular, with a learning rate of 0.0001, the model exhibited the highest performance, with accuracy of 92.92%, precision of 92.96%, recall of 92.92%, and F1 score of 92.93%. This optimal result was obtained by preventing overfitting and underfitting issues using various learning rate settings and finding the optimal hyperparameters. The study's findings confirm the potential for applying deep learning technologies to the classification of Korean archaeological materials, which is significant. Additionally, it was confirmed that the existing ImageNet dataset and parameters could be positively applied to the analysis of archaeological data. This approach could lead to the creation of various models for future archaeological database accumulation, the use of artifacts in museums, and classification and organization of artifacts.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.18 no.5
• /
• pp.523-529
• /
• 2024

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of differences in grid focal distance used in general radiography on the exposure index and image quality, and to provide useful information for the application of grids in clinical radiography. With AEC applied and SID set to 110 cm, 30 images were obtained for each focus distance of the grid at 110 cm, 140 cm, and 180 cm under the same exposure conditions. The dose was measured using the DAP and ESD, while image quality was evaluated using the SNR and CNR. The exposure index (EI) was determined based on the values shown in the image. EI was derived from the values indicated in the images. The mean DAP values at focus distances of 180, 140, and 110 cm were 10.944±0.613, 10.687±0.516, and 9.74±0.588 cGy·cm², respectively. The ESD values were 1041.75±57.92, 1019.99±49.61, and 930.86±55.77 μGy, while the EI values were 205.97±11.77, 210.59±10.37, and 193.8±11.86. The SNR values were 28.48±0.62, 28.41±0.64, and 27.13±0.72 dB, and the CNR values were 0.09859±0.004276, 0.09864±0.004378, and 0.09026±0.004783 dB. The differences in the mean values were statistically significant (p < 0.01). The values were significantly higher at focal distances of 140 cm and 180 cm compared to 110 cm, but there was no significant difference between the focal distances of 140 cm and 180 cm. The correlation analysis results revealed significant negative correlations between FD and DAP (r = -0.642, p < 0.01), ESD (r = -0.629, p < 0.01), EI (r = -0.376, p < 0.01), SNR (r = -0.615, p < 0.01), and CNR (r = -0.575, p < 0.01) for all variables. The results of this study showed a moderate negative correlation between the focus distance of the grid and the SNR, CNR, DAP, and ESD, and a weak negative correlation with the EI. Therefore, radiological technologists should be aware that even when the same exposure conditions are applied using an AEC system, variations in focus distance of the grid can affect the exposure index, dose, and image quality. Careful consideration is needed when setting the target exposure index.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.27-35
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to investigate the features of CsI:Tl and $Gd_2O_2S$ detectors with an indirect conversion method using phantom in the DR (digital radiography) system by obtaining images of thick chest phantom, medium thickness thigh phantom, and thin hand phantom and by analyzing the SNR and CNR. As a result of measuring the SNR and CNR according to the thickness change of the subject, the SNR and CNR were higher in CsI:Tl detector than in $Gd_2O_2S$ detector when the medium thickness thigh phantom and thin hand phantom were scanned. However, when the thick chest phantom was used, for the SNR at 80~125 kVp and the CNR at 80~110 kVp in the $Gd_2O_2S$ detector, the values were higher than those of CsI:Tl detector. The SNR and CNR both increased as the tube voltage increased. The SNR and CNR of CsI:Tl detector in the medium thickness thigh phantom increased at 40~50 kVp and decreased as the tube voltage increased. The SNR and CNR of $Gd_2O_2S$ detector increased at 40~60 kVp and decreased as the tube voltage increased. The SNR and CNR of CsI:Tl detctor in the thin hand phantom decreased at the low tube voltage and increased as the tube voltage increased, but they decreased again at 100~110 kVp, while the SNR and CNR of $Gd_2O_2S$ detector were found to decrease as the tube voltage increased. The MTF of CsI:Tl detector was 6.02~90.90% higher than that of $Gd_2O_2S$ detector at 0.5~3 lp/mm. The DQE of CsI:Tl detector was 66.67~233.33% higher than that of $Gd_2O_2S$ detector. In conclusion, although the values of CsI:Tl detector were higher than those of $Gd_2O_2S$ detector in the comparison of MTF and DQE, the cheaper $Gd_2O_2S$ detector had higher SNR and CNR than the expensive CsI:Tl detector at a certain tube voltage range in the thick check phantom. At chest X-ray, if the $Gd_2O_2S$ detector is used rather than the CsI:Tl detector, chest images with excellent quality can be obtained, which will be useful for examination. Moreover, price/performance should be considered when determining the detector type from the viewpoint of the user.

• Journal of Venture Innovation
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.107-127
• /
• 2022

Global challenges such as the corona pandemic, climate change and the war-on-tech ensure that the demand who the technologies of the future develops and monitors prominently for will be on the agenda. Development of, and applications in, agrifood, biotech, high-tech, medtech, quantum, AI and photonics are the basis of the future earning capacity of the Netherlands and contribute to solving societal challenges, close to home and worldwide. To be like the Netherlands and Europe a strategic position in the to obtain knowledge and innovation chain, and with it our autonomy in relation to from China and the United States insurance, clear choices are needed. Brainport Eindhoven: Building on Philips' knowledge base, there is create an innovative ecosystem where more than 7,000 companies in the High-tech Systems & Materials (HTSM) collaborate on new technologies, future earning potential and international value chains. Nearly 20,000 private R&D employees work in 5 regional high-end campuses and for companies such as ASML, NXP, DAF, Prodrive Technologies, Lightyear and many others. Brainport Eindhoven has a internationally leading position in the field of system engineering, semicon, micro and nanoelectronics, AI, integrated photonics and additive manufacturing. What is being developed in Brainport leads to the growth of the manufacturing industry far beyond the region thanks to chain cooperation between large companies and SMEs. South-Holland: The South Holland ecosystem includes companies as KPN, Shell, DSM and Janssen Pharmaceutical, large and innovative SMEs and leading educational and knowledge institutions that have more than Invest €3.3 billion in R&D. Bearing Cores are formed by the top campuses of Leiden and Delft, good for more than 40,000 innovative jobs, the port-industrial complex (logistics & energy), the manufacturing industry cluster on maritime and aerospace and the horticultural cluster in the Westland. South Holland trains thematically key technologies such as biotech, quantum technology and AI. Twente: The green, technological top region of Twente has a long tradition of collaboration in triple helix bandage. Technological innovations from Twente offer worldwide solutions for the large social issues. Work is in progress to key technologies such as AI, photonics, robotics and nanotechnology. New technology is applied in sectors such as medtech, the manufacturing industry, agriculture and circular value chains, such as textiles and construction. Being for Twente start-ups and SMEs of great importance to the jobs of tomorrow. Connect these companies technology from Twente with knowledge regions and OEMs, at home and abroad. Wageningen in FoodValley: Wageningen Campus is a global agri-food magnet for startups and corporates by the national accelerator StartLife and student incubator StartHub. FoodvalleyNL also connects with an ambitious 2030 programme, the versatile ecosystem regional, national and international - including through the WEF European food innovation hub. The campus offers guests and the 3,000 private R&D put in an interesting programming science, innovation and social dialogue around the challenges in agro production, food processing, biobased/circular, climate and biodiversity. The Netherlands succeeded in industrializing in logistics countries, but it is striving for sustainable growth by creating an innovative ecosystem through a regional industry-academic research model. In particular, the Brainport Cluster, centered on the high-tech industry, pursues regional innovation and is opening a new horizon for existing industry-academic models. Brainport is a state-of-the-art forward base that leads the innovation ecosystem of Dutch manufacturing. The history of ports in the Netherlands is transforming from a logistics-oriented port symbolized by Rotterdam into a "port of digital knowledge" centered on Brainport. On the basis of this, it can be seen that the industry-academic cluster model linking the central government's vision to create an innovative ecosystem and the specialized industry in the region serves as the biggest stepping stone. The Netherlands' innovation policy is expected to be more faithful to its role as Europe's "digital gateway" through regional development centered on the innovation cluster ecosystem and investment in job creation and new industries.