MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1030226014 · doi:10.1118/1.4926115

TH‐A‐213‐02: IAEA/AAPM Code of Practice for the Dosimetry of Static Small Photon Fields

2015· article· en· W1030226014 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimetryTomotherapyCode of practiceDosimeterMedical physicsPhysicsDetectorIonization chamberComputer scienceNuclear medicineRadiation therapyOpticsMedicineEngineeringIonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern radiotherapy techniques such as SRS/SRT, SBRT, IMRT, VMAT as well as specialized machines such as Tomotherapy, CyberKnife and Gamma Knife use small photon fields with at least one dimension <3 cm. Dosimetry in such small fields is challenging because of large detector perturbations due to non‐equilibrium conditions, occlusion of the primary photon source and large dose gradients across the field. Many small‐size dosimeters have been proposed for use in small fields. However, their characteristics especially the volume averaging and fluence perturbations have only recently been adequately understood. An IAEA‐AAPM working group has provided a framework for reference dosimetry in non‐compliant beams and the measurement of field output factors small fields (1). The AAPM TG‐155 (2) has adopted this framework to provide guidelines on relative dosimetry. This course explains the code of practice for absolute dosimetry that is under review and discusses the availability of correction factors to convert detector readings to doses. TG‐155 defines small field conditions, provides recommendations for suitable detectors and recommendations for good working practice for relative dosimetry (PDD, TMR, output factor, etc.) and dose calculations based on the new formulation. It also discusses beam modeling and dose calculations as a critical step in clinical utilization of small field radiotherapy. Alfonso et al, Med Phys 35, 5179–5186 (2008). Das et al, Med Phys (under review, 2014) Learning Objectives: Concepts and recommended procedures in the IAEA‐AAPM code of practice for dosimetry of small fields. Physics of dosimetry in non‐equilibrium conditions and definition of small fields Recommended procedures for relative dosimetry in TG‐1554. Choice of detectors for small field dosimetry, perturbations and corrections for dosimetry Understand the detector properties required for small field measurements Understand the advantages and limitations of commercially available detectors for small field dosimetry Research supported with operating grants from CIHR, NSERC, and BIOWin, a program funded at the Universite Catholique Louvain by the Walloon Government (Belgium). Student stipends supported by Medical Physics Research Training Network funded by the Collaborative Research and Training Experience program of the NSERC. Seuntjens: support by Sun Nuclear Corporation

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.054

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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