MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012905582 · doi:10.1118/1.3392247

Investigation of three radiation detectors for accurate measurement of absorbed dose in nonstandard fields

2010· article· en· W2012905582 on OpenAlexafffund
Eunah Chung, Hugo Bouchard, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInternational Atomic Energy Agency
KeywordsDosimetryImaging phantomIonization chamberAbsorbed dosePhysicsDose profileNuclear medicineMaterials scienceDetectorPercentage depth dose curveOpticsIonizationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To establish accurate experimental dosimetry techniques for reference dose measurements in nonstandard composite fields. METHODS: A cylindrical PMMA phantom filled with water was constructed, at the center of which reference absorbed dose to water for a head and neck IMRT delivery was measured. Based on the proposed new formalism for reference dosimetry of nonstandard fields [Alfonso et al., Med. Phys. 35, 5179-5186 (2008)], a candidate plan-class specific reference (pcsr) field for a typical head and neck IMRT delivery was created on the CT images of the phantom. The absorbed dose to water in the pcsr field normalized to that in a reference 10 x 10 cm2 field was measured using three radiation detectors: Gafchromic EBT films, a diamond detector, and a guarded liquid-filled ionization chamber developed in-house (GLIC-03). Pcsr correction factors [formula in text] were determined for five different types of air-filled ionization chambers (Exradin A12, NE-2571, Exradin A1SL, Exradin A14, and PinPoint 31006) in a fully rotated delivery and in a delivery with the same MLC settings and weights but from a single gantry angle (a collapsed delivery). RESULTS: The combined standard uncertainty in measuring the correction factor [formula in text] using the three dosimetry techniques was 0.3%. For all the air-filled ionization chambers and the pcsr field tested, the correction factor was not different from unity by more than +/- 0.8%. For the fully rotated delivery, the correction factors were in a narrow range of 0.9955-0.9986, while in the collapsed delivery, they were in a slightly broader range of 0.9922-1.0048. In the collapsed delivery, the Farmer-type chambers (Exradin A12 and NE2571) had very similar correction factors (0.9922 and 0.9931, respectively), whereas the correction factors for the smaller chambers showed more distinct chamber-type dependence. CONCLUSIONS: The authors have established three experimental dosimetry techniques that allow reference measurements of nonstandard field correction factors [formula in text] for air-filled ionization chambers at the 0.3% 1sigma uncertainty level. These techniques can be used to determine criteria for the selection of plan-class specific reference fields and ultimately improve clinical reference dosimetry of nonstandard fields.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations32
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207