Patient handling system for carbon ion beam scanning therapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our institution established a new treatment facility for carbon ion beam scanning therapy in 2010. The major advantages of scanning beam treatment compared to the passive beam treatment are the following: high dose conformation with less excessive dose to the normal tissues, no bolus compensator and patient collimator/multi-leaf collimator, better dose efficiency by reducing the number of scatters. The new facility was designed to solve several problems encountered in the existing facility, at which several thousand patients were treated over more than 15 years. Here, we introduce the patient handling system in the new treatment facility. The new facility incorporates three main systems, a scanning irradiation system (S-IR), treatment planning system (TPS), and patient handling system (PTH). The PTH covers a wide range of functions including imaging, geometrical/position accuracy including motion management (immobilization, robotic arm treatment bed), layout of the treatment room, treatment workflow, software, and others. The first clinical trials without respiratory gating have been successfully started. The PTH allows a reduction in patient stay in the treatment room to as few as 7 min. The PTH plays an important role in carbon ion beam scanning therapy at the new institution, particularly in the management of patient handling, application of image-guided therapy, and improvement of treatment workflow, and thereby allows substantially better treatment at minimum cost.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it