MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000635130 · doi:10.1002/mats.200900023

Mathematical Modeling of PAG‐ and NIPAM‐Based Polymer Gel Dosimeters Contaminated by Oxygen and Inhibitor

2009· article· en· W2000635130 on OpenAlexafffund
V I Koeva, Shahab Daneshvar, Robert J. Senden, A. H. M. Imam, L J Schreiner, Kimberley B. McAuley

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Theory and Simulations · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCancer Care South EastQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsQueen's University
KeywordsDosimeterContaminationOxygenCopolymerAcrylamidePolymerLimiting oxygen concentrationPolymerizationAbsorbed doseMaterials scienceChemistryRadiationRadiochemistryBiological systemChemical engineeringPhysicsOrganic chemistryNuclear physicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A mathematical model for crosslinking copolymerization of acrylamide (or NIPAM) and N,N'‐methylenebisacrylamide is extended to account for contamination by oxygen and the inhibitor MEHQ. This model improves basic understanding of interactions among oxygen, MEHQ and polymerization reactions in gel dosimeters that are used to verify radiation doses delivered by cancer treatment equipment. Improved parameter estimates result in a good match between model predictions and data. The model predicts that a larger absorbed dose will be required to overcome the oxygen inhibition with increasing oxygen contamination, in agreement with experimental data. The model also predicts that MEHQ, in the absence of oxygen, has almost no influence on dosimeter response. magnified image

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromolecular Theory and SimulationsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207