A small-body portable graphite calorimeter for dosimetry in low-energy clinical proton beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calorimetry has been recommended and performed in proton beams for some time, but never has graphite calorimetry been used as a reference dosimeter in clinical proton beams. Furthermore, only a few calorimetry measurements have been reported in ocular proton beams. In this paper we describe the construction and performance of a small-body portable graphite calorimeter for clinical low-energy proton beams. Perturbation correction factors for the gap effect, volume averaging effect, heat transfer phenomena and impurity effect are calculated and applied in a comparison with ionization chamber dosimetry following IAEA TRS-398. The ratio of absorbed dose to water obtained from the calorimeter measurements and from the ionization measurements varied between 0.983 and 1.019, depending on the beam type and the ionization chamber calibration modality. Standard uncertainties on these values varied between 1.9% and 2.5% including a substantial contribution from the kQ values in IAEA TRS-398. The (Wair/e)p values inferred from these measurements varied between 33.6 J C(-1) and 34.9 J C(-1) with similar standard uncertainties. A number of improvements for the small-body portable graphite calorimeter and the experimental set-up are suggested for potential reduction of the uncertainties.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".