MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1964464551 · doi:10.1118/1.2761610

TH-A-M100A-01: Accurate Clinical Measurements

2007· article· en· W1964464551 on OpenAlexaff
John Gibbons, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimetryMedical physicsProtocol (science)Computer scienceMedical imagingPhysicsNuclear medicineMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiation therapy is rapidly moving into the direction of image guidance, functional target volumes, hypofractionation, dose escalation and 4D deliveries. In this era of joint imaging-therapy developments, accurate dosimetry techniques are often considered an issue of the past. However, clinical reality increasingly requires dealings with non-protocol compliant reference dosimetry as well as complex charged particle disequilibrium measurements and their interpretation. This presentation consists of two parts: the first part will review principles of measurement dosimetry, definitions of detectors and phantoms, reference dosimetry for conventional as well as non-protocol compliant technologies. The second part will review principles of relative dosimetry measurements, focusing on scanning and integrated measurements usually performed at time of beam commissioning. We will conclude with a discussion of dosimetry in special cases including the photon build-up region as well as narrow and dynamic fields. Educational Objectives 1. To understand the principles of clinical measurement dosimetry. 2. To get an overview of detectors and phantoms for reference and relative dosimetry. 3. To understand reference dosimetry techniques in protocol compliant and non-compliant beam arrangements. 4. To understand relative dosimetry techniques for the purpose of 3D dose distributions and to grasp areas of complication. 5. To understand integrated relative dosimetry measurements in photon and electron beams. 6. To be aware of non electronic equilibrium types of measurements in the photon build-up and for small photon fields.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.014

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.335 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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