MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2009110317 · doi:10.1118/1.4740201

Sci—Fri PM: Delivery — 06: A generalized solution to the wide field array calibration method

2012· article· en· W2009110317 on OpenAlexaff
Balázs Nyíri, L Gerig

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalibrationField (mathematics)Computer scienceMedical physicsPhysicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi detector arrays are commonly used in radiation oncology for IMRT and Linac QA. The calibration of detector arrays is usually based on the wide field calibration technique. Unfortunately small beam changes between measurements will result in large error propagation. The present work introduces a generalized modified version of the wide field calibration method, robust against measurement to measurement variation. Our generalized framework uses an unlimited number of measurement pairs, n geometric positions providing n(n-1)/2 pairs. We solve this large over determined linear system using least squares with gradient method. Measurements were made on an Elekta synergy 6 MV beam with two IBA Matrixx detectors, each containing a 32 × 32 array (1024) of vented pixel ionization chambers. Data acquisition was by the IBA Omnipro Advance software, version 1.2 running in the "ONLINE" cine mode with a 10 sec integration time. Continuous beam sampling (10 seconds long) measured over 10 minutes demonstrated why consistent calibration using the conventional wide field calibration is a challenge. Overall signal changes of 1.6%, flatness changes of 0.3% and the beam symmetry changes of 0.2% over the full 10 minute beam-on time were observed. For the purpose of testing and demonstration of our method, we have chosen to make measurements in 5 geometric orientations relative to the beam, including 1 reference position, 2 rotations and 2 translations. With our method we were able to calibrate all 1024 detectors to better than 0.6% total uncertainty as demonstrated against inter and intra MatriXX comparison.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→