MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1601040895 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2000.897910

A two step algorithm for predicting portal dose images in arbitrary detectors

2002· article· en· W1601040895 on OpenAlexaff
B McCurdy, Stephen Pistorius

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorImaging phantomMonte Carlo methodFluenceAlgorithmPhotonPhysicsDosimetrySlabComputer scienceOpticsMathematicsNuclear medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An algorithm has been presented which accurately predicts portal dose images for arbitrary detectors and air gaps. Implementation involves first predicting the primary and scattered photon fluence into a detector, then predicting the dose response of the detector. The algorithm utilizes pre-calculated libraries of scatter fluence kernels and dose deposition kernels, which are obtained through Monte Carlo radiation transport techniques. The algorithm is fast, allows a separation of primary and scatter, and can model arbitrary detector materials. The accuracy of the algorithm was investigated for a 6 MV beam over air gaps of 10-80 cm for a PMMA slab phantom, a PMMA slab with a cork inhomogeneity, and an anthropomorphic phantom. Two different detector configurations were used, involving low and high atomic number buildup material. In most cases (>95%), the difference between predicted and measured doses is within 3%, and penumbra's are within 4 mm. This level of accuracy is within the guidelines set out for treatment planning dose calculation algorithms. It is concluded that this approach represents a fast, accurate, and flexible solution to portal dose image prediction.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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