1 / 20

DICOS

DICOS. DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS—IN SECURITY Dezso Csipo Object Forge, Inc. Co-Authors: Harry Massey and Jean Johnson (NEMA). T he security industry. There are many secure publically accessible facilities in the world, but the most frequently used ones are AIRPORTS.

lolita
Download Presentation

DICOS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DICOS DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS—IN SECURITY Dezso Csipo Object Forge, Inc. Co-Authors: Harry Massey and Jean Johnson (NEMA)

  2. The security industry • There are many secure publically accessible facilities in the world, but the most frequently used ones are AIRPORTS. • We all use them on a regular basis • We all have to clear security.

  3. Devices used in security • X-Ray Scanners • CT scanner • Metal Detectors • Back scatter whole body imagers • Puffers (analyzers for chemical residues) • MR spectography devices

  4. The data • Images • Flat X-Ray images (like DX) • CT images • Threat detection reports • Similar to CAD in medicine, but used more extensively. • Spectograms

  5. Background • The security Industry • One major US customer, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) • Many international customers in airport security • Other security applications worldwide • No standard interconnect between the various manufacturers.

  6. History • The standardization activity was initiated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), TSA. • The TSA recognized the progress made in the medical industry. • The TSA recognized the value in collaborative standards. • The TSA whished to minimize the length of effort required to develop a standard.

  7. History (continued) • Several contacts were established between NEMA and the TSA • Two years ago the effort was initiated by reaching an agreement between NEMA and DHS.

  8. Standard’s body organization • The industry director is Mr. Harry Massey Har_Massey@nema.org • The industry manager is Ms. Jean Johnson Jean.Johnson@nema.org • The Standard is being developed under the industry group designated IIC-1

  9. Standard’s Body Organization • There is a section committee in charge of the overall process and the final decisions concerning the standard. • There are for working groups and a technical committee • The Technical committee takes on an oversight role ad it is the final vote on technical issues. • The CT working group deals with the technology specific issues of CT image information object definitions. • The DX working group deals with the technology specific issues of Direct X-Ray device use in checked luggage and check-point environments. • The Threat Detection Report (TDR) working group deals with interpretation related issues, and the TDR IOD • The Transmission working group deals with transmission for the high volume applications.

  10. How Did We Do it? • NEMA searched for Technical experts to help with the effort. • Mr. Dezso Csipo of Object Forge, Inc. was hired as a consultant. • Later Mr. Don Van Sycle was hired as a consultant. • The industry representatives • Siemens • GE • L3 • Analogic • Reveal • Optosecurities • AS&E • Guardian • Rapiscan • And others…

  11. How Did We DO It? • Selling the concept of building on DICOM. • Was not easy: • DICOM has an antiquated encoding (binary not XML) • DICOM is believed to be a chatty transmission protocol (an image issue resulting from poor early implementations) • A large number of industry representatives had no exposure to DICOM • Then Why DICOM? • Proven Interoperability • Industry History • A consensus standard that has succeeded in the marketplace • Pressure from DHS • The successes of DICONDE in testing.

  12. What Did We DO? • Defined the real world model. • Identified the modalities to be addressed by the first draft of the standard. • Identified the timelines desired by DHS • Formed the workgroups assigned the modules that each workgroup had to address

  13. The Technical Committee • Overall responsibility for the entire standard. • The definition of: • The Object Of Inspection (OOI) module • The OOI Owner Module • The Common IE modules and Macros • The integration of the IODs into the standard.

  14. The CT Workgroup • Responsible for defining all CT related Modules. • CT Image Multiframe Functional Group Macros.. • Frame of Reference Module . • Multiframe Dimension Module.. • CT Series Module • CT Image Module • CT Image Functional Group Macros • Common CT Descriptions • Multiframe Functional Groups Module

  15. The DX Workgroup • Responsible for all DX related Modules • DX Series • DX Detector • DX Positioning • X-Ray Generation • X-Ray Filtration

  16. The TDR Workgroup • Responsible for the definition ot the TDR modules • Threat Detection Report Module • Threat Sequence Module

  17. The Transmission Workgroup • The workgroup was created to address concerns of transmission of extra high volume applications (2Gigabytes/sec or higher) • The workgroup evaluated the viability of DICOM DIMSE for sutability

  18. And the result is

  19. Next Steps • More IODs for more modalities • AIT (formerly known as Whole Body Imaging) • Spectographs • Additional TDR types • Manual inspection results • On screen resolution results • Workflow management and integration with external systems • Expansion of the coded terminology.

  20. Questions?

More Related