MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977981469 · doi:10.1118/1.4894940

Sci-Fri AM: Mountain - 01: Validation of a new formulism and the related correction factors on output factor determination for small photon fields

2014· article· en· W1977981469 on OpenAlexaff
Yizhen Wang, Kelly C. Younge, Michelle Nielsen, Theodore F. Mutanga, Congwu Cui, Indra J. Das

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsTrillium Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorDosimetryIonization chamberPhysicsMonte Carlo methodPhotonOpticsConical surfaceLinear particle acceleratorField (mathematics)Computational physicsNuclear medicineBeam (structure)StatisticsMathematicsIonGeometryIonizationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small field dosimetry measurements including output factors are difficult due to lack of charged-particle equilibrium, occlusion of the radiation source, the finite size of detectors, and non-water equivalence of detector components. With available detectors significant variations could be measured that will lead to incorrect delivered dose to patients. IAEA/AAPM have provided a framework and formulation to correct the detector response in small photon fields. Monte Carlo derived correction factors for some commonly used small field detectors are now available, however validation has not been performed prior to this study. An Exradin A16 chamber, EDGE detector and SFD detector were used to perform the output factor measurement for a series of conical fields (5–30mm) on a Varian iX linear accelerator. Discrepancies up to 20%, 10% and 6% were observed for 5, 7.5 and 10 mm cones between the initial output factors measured by the EDGE detector and the A16 ion chamber, while the discrepancies for the conical fields larger than 10 mm were less than 4%. After the application of the correction, the output factors agree well with each other to within 1%. Caution is needed when determining the output factors for small photon fields, especially for fields 10 mm in diameter or smaller. More than one type of detector should be used, each with proper corrections applied to the measurement results. It is concluded that with the application of correction factors to appropriately chosen detectors, output can be measured accurately for small fields.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207