MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1976735425 · doi:10.1118/1.3476102

Sci—Thur PM: YIS — 07: A Two Dimensional Plastic Scintillation Detector Array for Quality Assurance of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

2010· article· en· W1976735425 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Guillot, L Gingras, Louis Archambault, Sam Beddar, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorOpticsScintillationDosimetryQuality assuranceMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Ionization chamberDose profileLinear particle acceleratorPhysicsNuclear medicineIonizationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The goals of this study are: 1) to present a novel two Dimensional Plastic Scintillation Detector array (2D‐PSD) for measurements of complex dose distributions, 2) to demonstrate that the 2D‐PSD can be used for high accuracy dose measurements for variable beam incidences. Methods and Materials: The 2D‐PSD consists of 781 PSDs inserted vertically in a plastic water slab covering a 26×26 cm2 region. The prototype is built entirely from nearly water equivalent plastic materials. To characterize the angular dependence of the 2D‐PSD, the detector array was irradiated with a square field size 10×10 cm2 using variable beam incidences from 0° to 120°. Furthermore, a clinical head and neck IMRT plan composed of nine beams was delivered on the 2D‐PSD by keeping the gantry of the linear accelerator fixed at 0°. The dose distributions measured with the 2D‐PSD were compared to calculations from a treatment planning system (Pinnacle3, Philips Medical Systems) on a CT scan of the 2D‐PSD and with measurements taken with an ionization chambers array (MatriXX Evolution, IBA Dosimetry). Results: The results from the angular dependence study indicate an excellent agreement between the measured and calculated dose distributions. The gamma evaluation of the IMRT plan delivered was successful for 98.5% of the detectors for a dose tolerance of 3% and a distance to agreement of 3 mm. Conclusion: The results presented in this work suggest that the developed 2D‐PSD could be used as a quality assurance tool for IMRT and arc therapy patient plan verification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→