MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1446242577 · doi:10.1118/1.4926195

TH-AB-201-11: A Systematic Characterization of the Low Energy Response of Plastic Scintillation Detectors

2015· article· en· W1446242577 on OpenAlexaff
J.-F. Boivin, Sam Beddar, Daniel Schmidt, Wesley S. Culberson, C Bonde, Maxime Guillemette, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScintillatorScintillationOpticsMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Attenuation lengthPhotomultiplierOptical fiberCalibrationDetectorPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To characterize the low energy behavior of scintillating material used in plastic scintillation detectors. Methods: Four plastic scintillation detectors (PSDs) were developed using three different scintillating material (BCF-10, BCF-12, BCF-60) and one scintillator-free fiber. The scintillators were 1 mm in diameter and 10 mm-long, coupled to a 15 meter long clear PMMA optical fiber. A photomultiplier tube was connected to this fiber to collect the scintillator's light signal. All fibers were covered by a light-tight polyethylene jacket. The PSDs were exposed to AAPM accredited low energy beam qualities ranging from 20 kVp to 250 kVp. Their response described the dose in polystyrene and was compared to the dose in air measured by a primary calibration chamber located at the beam exit. The mean energy and the spectral method were used to extract the effective mass energy-absorption coefficient using NIST database for each beam quality reference spectrum. Attenuation in air and in the fiber jacket were also considered. The scintillators expected response was compared to the experimental measurements and an energy-dependent correction factor was identified to account for low energy quenching occurring within the scintillators. Results: The clear optical fiber response was below 0.5% of the scintillator's light, which indicated that a negligible amount of fluorescence contamination was produced. The scintillators response increased by a factor 3.65 ± 0.07 between a 20 kVp and a 250 kVp beam. The correction factor varied with beam energy and remained above 84% for beam qualities of 30 kVp and above, but drops for very low energy (20 kVp) to about 77%. Conclusion: This work describes the PSD energy dependence to low energy beam qualities and identifies a correction factor related to low energy quenching. A detailed comprehension of intrinsic scintillator response is essential when designing accurate PSD dosimeters for radiology purposes. This work was supported in part by a NIH/NCI SBIR grant R44CA153824 and by grant # 435510 from the NSERC. JB is supported by a FQRNT doctoral research scholarchip and acknowledges partial support by the NSERC CREATE Medical Physics Research Training Network grant # 432290.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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→