MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010273749 · doi:10.1118/1.2815941

An absorbed dose to water standard for HDR brachytherapy sources based on water calorimetry: Numerical and experimental proof‐of‐principle

2007· letter· en· W2010273749 on OpenAlexafffund
Arman Sarfehnia, K Stewart, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Disease Control LaboratoryMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKermaCalorimeter (particle physics)Absorbed doseMultiphysicsCalorimetryBrachytherapyDosimetryMaterials sciencePercentage depth dose curveThermoluminescent dosimeterThermoluminescent DosimetryNuclear engineeringNuclear medicineDetectorOpticsComputational physicsIonization chamberDosimeterPhysicsRadiation therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water calorimetry is an established technique for absorbed dose to water measurements in external beams. In this paper, the feasibility of direct absorbed dose measurements for high dose rate (HDR) iridium-192 (192Ir) sources using water calorimetry is established. Feasibility is determined primarily by a balance between the need to obtain sufficient signal to perform a reproducible measurement, the effect of heat loss on the measured signal, and the positioning uncertainty affecting the source-detector distance. The heat conduction pattern generated in water by the Nucletron microSelectron-HDR 192Ir brachytherapy source was simulated using COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS software. Source heating due to radiation self-absorption was calculated using EGSnrcMP. A heat-loss correction k(c) was calculated as the ratio of the temperature rise under ideal conditions to temperature rise under realistic conditions. The calorimeter setup used a parallel-plate calorimeter vessel of 79 mm diameter and 1.12 mm thick front and rear glass windows located 24 mm apart. Absorbed dose was measured with two sources with nominal air kerma strengths of 38 000 and 21 000 U, at source-detector separations ranging from 24.7 to 27.6 mm and irradiation times of 36.0 to 80.0 s. The preliminary measured dose rate per unit air kerma strength of (0.502 +/- 0.007) microGy/(s U) compares well with the TG-43 derived 0.505 microGy/(s U). This work shows that combined dose uncertainties of significantly less than 5% can be achieved with only modest modifications of current water calorimetry techniques and instruments. This work forms the basis of a potential future absolute dose to water standard for HDR 192Ir brachytherapy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207