MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1963755351 · doi:10.1118/1.2244641

Po‐Thur Eve General‐14: 3rd Generation Co‐60 based Megavoltage Computed Tomography

2006· article· en· W1963755351 on OpenAlexaff
Craig A. Peters, M Rogers, David Eyles, A Kerr, G Salomons, L J Schreiner

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomTomotherapyImage-guided radiation therapyMedical imagingNuclear medicineFlat panel detectorContext (archaeology)DosimetryMedical physicsMaterials scienceMedicineDetectorRadiation therapyOpticsRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient set up verification is a necessary step for high precision radiation therapy. There has been considerable work to develop such verification using megavoltage (MV) imaging on Electronic Portal Imaging Devices (EPIDs). Recently, MV image guidance has been advanced with the extension to MV computed tomography (MVCT). At the CCSEO we have been investigating MVCT with a Cobalt‐60 unit, in the context of developing Cobalt‐60 tomotherapy. The system is comprised of an automated rotary stage added to a Theratronics T780C Co‐60 unit; recently our imaging has advanced with the development of a 3rd generation imaging system using a Varian PortalVision LC250 EPID. The EPID was calibrated for relative dose‐response using a parallel‐plate ion chamber; the calibration curve follows a quadratic form. The image reconstruction is based on a generalized Feldkamp technique; executed in MATLAB. Consistent with previous 1st generation studies, results on various phantoms show that Co‐60 based EPID — MVCT is free from beam hardening and metallic artifacts. Phantoms included a variety of orthopaedic hip implants, Rando head phantom with stainless steel and tungsten inserts, and a plug phantom containing materials of known atomic number. EPID determined MVCT numbers also correspond linearly with relative electron density. The work will summarize the differences between kVp and MV CT images, while highlighting the improvements of EPID based imaging over 1st generation Cobalt MVCT.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.015

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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