MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984184590 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/5/005

Development of a Monte Carlo model for the Brainlab microMLC

2005· article· en· W1984184590 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Bélec, Horacio Patrocinio, Frank Verhaegen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodImaging phantomMultileaf collimatorLinear particle acceleratorCollimatorPhysicsOpticsComputational physicsBeam (structure)RadiosurgeryMaterials scienceNuclear medicineMathematicsRadiation therapyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stereotactic radiosurgery with several static conformal beams shaped by a micro multileaf collimator (microMLC) is used to treat small irregularly shaped brain lesions. Our goal is to perform Monte Carlo calculations of dose distributions for certain treatment plans as a verification tool. A dedicated microMLC component module for the BEAMnrc code was developed as part of this project and was incorporated in a model of the Varian CL2300 linear accelerator 6 MV photon beam. As an initial validation of the code, the leaf geometry was visualized by tracing particles through the component module and recording their position each time a leaf boundary was crossed. The leaf dimensions were measured and the leaf material density and interleaf air gap were chosen to match the simulated leaf leakage profiles with film measurements in a solid water phantom. A comparison between Monte Carlo calculations and measurements (diode, radiographic film) was performed for square and irregularly shaped fields incident on flat and homogeneous water phantoms. Results show that Monte Carlo calculations agree with measured dose distributions to within 2% and/or 1 mm except for field size smaller than 1.2 cm diameter where agreement is within 5% due to uncertainties in measured output factors.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations46
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207