MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973988912 · doi:10.1118/1.1784131

An investigation of accelerator head scatter and output factor in air

2004· article· en· W1973988912 on OpenAlexaff
G Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsIsocenterCollimatorMonte Carlo methodLinear particle acceleratorDosimetryIonization chamberOpticsBeam (structure)PhysicsImaging phantomPercentage depth dose curveBackscatter (email)Head (geology)PhotonNuclear medicineIonizationMathematicsComputer scienceMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our purpose in this study was to investigate whether the Monte Carlo simulation can accurately predict output factors in air. Secondary goals were to study the head scatter components and investigate the collimator exchange effect. The Monte Carlo code, BEAMnrc, was used in the study. Photon beams of 6 and 18 MV were from a Varian Clinac 2100EX accelerator and the measurements were performed using an ionization chamber in a mini-phantom. The Monte Carlo calculated in air output factors was within 1% of measured values. The simulation provided information of the origin and the magnitude of the collimator exchange effect. It was shown that the collimator backscatter to the beam monitor chamber played a significant role in the beam output factors. However the magnitude of the scattered dose contributions from the collimator at the isocenter is negligible. The maximum scattered dose contribution from the collimators was about 0.15% and 0.4% of the total dose at the isocenter for a 6 and 18 MV beam, respectively. The scattered dose contributions from the flattening filter at the isocenter were about 0.9-3% and 0.2-6% of the total dose for field sizes of 4x4 cm2-40x40 cm2 for the 6 and 18 MV beam, respectively. The study suggests that measurements of head scatter factors be done at large depth well beyond the depth of electron contamination. The insight information may have some implications for developing generalized empirical models to calculate the head scatter.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207