A Monte Carlo study of the variation of electron fluence in water from a 6 MV photon beam outside of the field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing studies have suggested some debate on whether the quality of radiation that delivers dose outside of the primary field of a radiotherapy photon beam can be considered the same as that inside the primary field. We used a Monte Carlo approach to simulate the electron fluence differential in energy inside a water phantom in response to irradiation by a 6 MV photon beam. The goal was to quantify how significantly the electron fluence changes when moving from a volume exposed to the primary field to one outside of the primary field, and understand any potential biological implications. We scored the electron fluence outwards in annular volumes in response to a 5 cm radius 6 MV beam and at the central axis in response to a rectangular 6 MV beam partially blocked by an MLC. The resulting fluence spectra were compared to different low-LET sources for which biological response in the form of chromosomal aberrations has been published. Our results show a significant increase in the low energy component of the fluence spectra outside of the primary field, which increases the mean LET to values similar to that seen in response to a 137Cs photon source. In turn, it is shown that this has the potential to increase the RBE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".