SU‐E‐T‐410: Initial Results From Multiple Irradiations of An Anthropomorphic Liver Phantom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the Radiological Physics Center's new anthropomorphic liver phantom and to report the results from the initial irradiations. Methods: A new imaging and dosimetry insert was created for the RPC's pelvic phantom that includes non‐coplanar targets. The polystyrene insert represents the liver and includes two Solid WaterTM targets (PTV1 and PTV2) that mimic liver metastases. PTV1, located in the superior‐left‐posterior region of the insert, is an ovoid 2 cm in diameter and 2.5 cm long. PTV2, located in the inferior‐right‐anterior region of the insert is a 3 cm diameter sphere. The insert houses one TLD and 3 planes of radiochromic film in each PTV. The phantom, with a motion table to simulate respiratory motion, was sent to institutions planning to participate in an upcoming RTOG SBRT liver protocol. Institutions were instructed to design and deliver a stereotactic treatment plan that delivered 6 Gy to >=95% of each PTV. The maximum motion of the phantom on the motion table was 1 cm in the superior‐inferior direction. Results: Irradiations from 8 institutions have been analyzed. The acceptance criteria, based on the results of the 8 irradiations, were set at ±7% for the TLD and 85% of the pixels in a region surrounding each PTV passing a ±7%/4 mm global gamma analysis. Five of the 8 irradiations passed these criteria. The three irradiations that did not meet the criteria failed to meet only the film criteria. Breath hold, ITV, gating, and tracking techniques were used to account for motion. Pinnacle, Eclipse, and MultiPlan treatment planning systems were used for planning. Conclusion: The new liver insert along with a motion table tests the ability of the institution's ability to deliver dose to multiple moving targets and is a useful credentialing tool for clinical trials using SBRT. Supported by PHS grant CA10953 and CA081647 from the NCI, DHHS.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".