SU‐E‐T‐315: The Change of Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters (OSLDs) Sensitivity by Accumulated Dose and High Dose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study is to evaluate radiation sensitivity of optical stimulated luminance dosimeters (OSLDs) by accumulated dose and high dose. Methods: This study was carried out in Co‐60 unit (Theratron 780, AECL, and Canada) and used InLight MicroStar reader (Landauer, Inc., Glenwood, IL) for reading. We annealed for 30 min using optical annealing system which contained fluorescent lamps (Osram lumilux, 24 W, 280 ∼780 nm). To evaluate change of OSLDs sensitivity by repeated irradiation, the dosimeters were repeatedly irradiated with 1 Gy. And whenever a repeated irradiation, we evaluated OSLDs sensitivity. To evaluate OSLDs sensitivity after accumulated dose with 5 Gy, We irradiated dose accumulatively (from 1 Gy to 5 Gy) without annealing. And OSLDs was also irradiated with 15, 20, 30 Gy to certify change of OSLDs sensitivity after high dose irradiation. After annealing them, they were irradiated with 1Gy, repeatedly. Results: The OSLDs sensitivity increased up to 3% during irradiating seven times and decreased continuously above 8 times. That dropped by about 0.35 Gy per an irradiation. Finally, after 30 times irradiation, OSLDs sensitivity decreased by about 7%. For accumulated dose from 1 Gy to 5 Gy, OSLDs sensitivity about 1 Gy increased until 4.4% after second times accumulated dose compared with before that. OSLDs sensitivity about 1 Gy decreased by 1.6% in five times irradiation. When OSLDs were irradiated ten times with 1Gy after irradiating high dose (10, 15, 20 Gy), OSLDs sensitivity decreased until 6%, 9%, 12% compared with it before high dose irradiation, respectively. Conclusion: This study certified OSLDs sensitivity by accumulated dose and high dose. When irradiated with 1Gy, repeatedly, OSLDs sensitivity decreased linearly and the reduction rate of OSLDs sensitivity after high dose irradiation had dependence on irradiated dose.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".