MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997462079 · doi:10.1118/1.1582469

Dosimetric properties of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device for verification of dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy

2003· article· en· W1997462079 on OpenAlexaff
Peter B. Greer, C. Popescu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultileaf collimatorReproducibilityImage-guided radiation therapyIonization chamberDosimetryCalibrationLinear particle acceleratorMaterials scienceCollimatorNuclear medicineIntensity modulationDose profileOpticsBeam (structure)Medical imagingBiomedical engineeringMedicinePhysicsMathematicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dosimetric properties of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for verification of dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery were investigated. The EPID was utilized with continuous frame-averaging during the beam delivery. Properties studied included effect of buildup, dose linearity, field size response, sampling of rapid multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf speeds, response to dose-rate fluctuations, memory effect, and reproducibility. The dependence of response on EPID calibration and a dead time in image frame acquisition occurring every 64 frames were measured. EPID measurements were also compared to ion chamber and film for open and wedged static fields and IMRT fields. The EPID was linear with dose and dose rate, and response to MLC leaf speeds up to 2.5 cm s(-1) was found to be linear. A field size dependent response of up to 5% relative to dmax ion-chamber measurement was found. Reproducibility was within 0.8% (1 standard deviation) for an IMRT delivery recorded at intervals over a period of one month. The dead time in frame acquisition resulted in errors in the EPID that increased with leaf speed and were over 20% for a 1 cm leaf gap moving at 1.0 cm s(-1). The EPID measurements were also found to depend on the input beam profile utilized for EPID flood-field calibration. The EPID shows promise as a device for verification of IMRT, the major limitation currently being due to dead-time in frame acquisition.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
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

Citations246
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207