Experimental determination of the anisotropy function and anisotropy factor for model 6711 I‐125 seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Model 6711 125I seeds are commonly used in permanent brachytherapy implants. While recommended dose distribution parameters for these sources have been published by AAPM TG-43, several investigators have recently questioned the presence of seemingly unphysical fluctuations in the anisotropy function data. Seeking to understand these, we measured the dimensions of eight model 6711 seeds radiographically, and made a new experimental determination of the anisotropy function and factor using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TL-100 chips and minicubes) in a solid water phantom. It was found that variations in seed capsule end weld thickness, and movement within the capsule of the Ag rod onto which the 125I is adsorbed, were present for all sources and thus contributed to experimental uncertainty. Averaging results from two different sources, from data acquired at the same time from diametrically opposed quadrants of the phantom, and from repeated measurements yielded anisotropy function values similar to those of TG-43 but characterized by greater precision (< or = 3% for radial distance r < or = 3 cm and < or = 1% for r > or = 4 cm), an absence of sharp fluctuations, and reduced magnitudes at r = 1 cm. The measured values can be well represented by an analytic function similar to that proposed by Furhang and Anderson to fit the TG-43 data. Values of the anisotropy factor derived from this function by integration exhibit little variation with r, in agreement with earlier diode data but in contrast to TG-43 data, and can also be represented by an analytic function. Finally, a difference in TLD chip and minicube reproducibility, observed here and by earlier investigators, is explained by reference to recent work (done concurrently with ours) as stemming from variations in dosimeter orientation and automated reader positioning/heating for minicubes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".