MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1017183032 · doi:10.1118/1.4926145

TH‐AB‐BRA‐02: Generation of 3D Dosimetric Reference Datasets for Commissioning and Validation of 192Ir Brachytherapy Model‐Based Dose Calculation Software

2015· article· en· W1017183032 on OpenAlexaff
Mary‐Anne Young, J. Vijande, Facundo Ballester, Åsa Carlsson Tedgren, Domingo Granero, Annette Haworth, Firas Mourtada, Gabriel Paiva Fonseca, K. Zourari, Panagiotis Papagiannis, Mark J. Rivard, F.A. Siebert, Ron S. Sloboda, Ryan Smith, Rowan M. Thomson, Frank Verhaegen, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomVoxelMonte Carlo methodBrachytherapyDosimetryDICOMPhysicsNuclear medicineComputer scienceMathematicsOpticsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMedicineRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Previously, generic HDR 192Ir source and shielded applicator were designed by WG‐ MBDCA, the AAPM‐ESTRO‐ABG Working Group on model‐based dose calculation algorithms. TPS vendors have incorporated both into their TPS. A charge of WG‐MBDCA is to develop a limited number of well‐defined test cases and perform MBDCA dose calculations and comparisons. Here, we describe the test cases proposed, the 3D dosimetric data generation process and the 3D gamma analysis performed. Methods: A voxelized phantom of 512×512×512 voxels (HU=‐1024,Air), with each voxel being 1×1×1 mm3, containing a concentric cubic contour structure (HU=0,Water) of dimension 201×201×201 voxels, was created in the DICOM‐ RT format. Three configurations were tested: i) source located at the center with surrounding structure assigned to water to mimic TG‐43 conditions, ii) source displaced +7 cm along the × axis, iii) source located at the center with the shielded applicator in place. Advanced Collapsed‐cone Engine (ACE, Elekta) and AcurosBV (Varian) were benchmarked. Reference datasets were independently produced by different groups using BrachyDose (1010 photons), GEANT4(4×1010), Penelope (2×1010), MCNP5(2 x1010), MCNP6(1011), and ALGEBRA(4×1010) Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation platforms. Results: For the three configurations, MC agreed within 1% for the volume bounded by the 1% isodose surface; MCNP6 data sets were designated as reference (statistical error < 0.2% across the phantom). A 2%/1mm 3D γ‐ index criteria was used, within the volume bounded by 5% isodose surface, to account for both dose difference and source placement errors in TPS. Voxel pass rates were 95.2%, 99.5% and 90% for ACE and 98%, 98.4% and 95.9% for AcurosBV, respectively. Conclusion: The evaluated test cases are suitable for MBDCA QA. DICOM‐RT files are being integrated into the joint AAPM/IROC Houston registry to support end‐user TPS software commissioning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→