MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002275998 · doi:10.1118/1.2964198

Dosimetric evaluation of a dedicated stereotactic linear accelerator using measurement and Monte Carlo simulation

2008· article· en· W2002275998 on OpenAlexaff
M. Heydarian, K. Asnaashari, M. Allahverdi, David A. Jaffray

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodLinear particle acceleratorIsocenterImaging phantomIonization chamberOpticsCollimated lightPhysicsPercentage depth dose curveMultileaf collimatorAperture (computer memory)DosimetryDetectorNuclear medicineBeam (structure)MathematicsMedicineIonizationAcousticsLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dosimetric parameters of a dedicated stereotactic linear accelerator have been investigated using measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. This linac has a unique built in multileaf collimation (MLC) system with the maximum opening of 16 x 21 cm2 and 4 mm leaf width at the isocenter and has successfully been modeled for the first time using the Monte Carlo simulation. The high resolution MLC, combined with its relatively large maximum field size, opens up a new opportunity for expanding stereotactic radiation treatment techniques from traditionally treating smaller targets to larger ones for both cranial and extracranial lesions. Dosimetric parameters of this linac such as accuracy of leaf positioning and field shaping, leakage and transmission, percentage depth doses, off-axes dose profiles, and dose penumbras were measured and calculated for different field sizes, depths, and source to surface distances. In addition, the ability of the linac in accurate dose delivery of several treatment plans, including intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), performed on phantom and patients was determined. Ionization chamber, photon diode detector, films, several solid water phantoms, and a water tank were used for the measurements. The MLC leaf positioning to any particular point in the maximum aperture was accurate with a standard deviation of 0.29 mm. Maximum and average leakages were 1.7% and 1.1% for the reference field of 10.4 x 9.6 cm2. Measured penumbra widths (80%-20%) for this field at source axis distance (SAD) of 100 cm at a depth of 1.5 cm (dmax) were 3.2 and 4 mm for the leaf-sides and leaf-ends, respectively. The corresponding results at 10 cm depth and SAD =100 cm were 5.4 and 6.3 mm. Monte Carlo results generally agreed with the measurements to within 1% and or 1 mm, with respective uncertainties of 0.5% and 0.2 mm. The linac accuracy in delivering non-IMRT treatment plans was better than 1%. Ionization chamber dosimetry results for a phantom IMRT plan in the high dose and low dose regions were -0.5% and +3.6%, respectively. Dosimetry results at isocenter for three patients' IMRT plans were measured to be within 3% of their corresponding treatment plans. Film dosimetry was also used to compare dose distributions of IMRT treatment plans and delivered cumulative doses at different cross sectional planes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207