MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591656435 · doi:10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4439

Energy response of EBT3 radiochromic films: implications for dosimetry in kilovoltage range

2014· article· en· W1591656435 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Eduardo Villarreal‐Barajas, Rao Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsDosimetryImaging phantomMaterials scienceNuclear medicineIrradiationScannerIonization chamberX-rayOpticsPhysicsMedicineNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to evaluate the suitability of recently introduced radiochromic film EBT3 for clinical dosimetry in the kilovoltage (kV) range. For this purpose, a kV X-ray irradiator, X RAD 320ix in the range 70 to 300 kVp, a clinical 60Co source, a 6 MV and an 18 MV X-ray clinical beam from a Varian linear accelerator were calibrated following AAPM dosimetry protocols. EBT3 films from two different EBT3 batches were placed side-by-side on the surface of a water phantom; doses from 0.5 to 4 Gy were delivered. Similarly, irradiations were performed for 60Co and 6 and 18 MV beams in a water equivalent phantom. Films were reproducibly placed at the center of a flatbed scanner and 48-bit RGB scans were obtained both pre- and postirradiations. Net optical density (netOD) and response for a given radiation quality relative to 60Co was determined for each EBT3 film. The netOD of the red color showed reproducible response (within 1%) for both batches when irradiated using the 60Co source. For a given dose of 1 Gy of kVp X-ray, the response relative to 60Co using the three color channels (red, green, and blue) decreases with decrease in kVp, reaching a maximum underresponse of ~ 20% for the 70 kVp. A significant underresponse of ~ 5% was observed at 300kVp. Responses of MV X-ray beams with respect to 60Co at the 1 Gy dose level showed no statistically significant difference. A relatively small difference in the response was observed between the two EBT3 batches used in this study in the kV X-ray range.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations81
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207