Phantom evaluation of a commercially available three modality image guided radiation therapy system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors describe a detailed evaluation of the capabilities of imaging and image registration systems available with Varian linear accelerators for image guided radiation therapy (IGRT). Specifically, they present modulation transfer function curves for megavoltage planar, kilovoltage (kV) planar, and cone beam computed tomography imaging systems and compare these with conventional computed tomography. While kV planar imaging displayed the highest spatial resolution, all IGRT imaging techniques were assessed as adequate for their intended purpose. They have also characterized the image registration software available for use in conjunction with these imaging systems through a comprehensive phantom study involving translations in three orthogonal directions. All combinations of imaging systems and image registration software were found to be accurate, although the planar kV imaging system with automatic registration was generally superior, with both accuracy and precision of the order of 1 mm, under the conditions tested. Based on their phantom study, the attainable accuracy for rigid body translations using any of the features available with Varian equipment will more likely be limited by the resolution of the couch readouts than by inherent limitations in the imaging systems and image registration software. Overall, the accuracy and precision of currently available IGRT technology exceed published experience with the accuracy and precision of contouring for planning.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".