MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018337830 · doi:10.1118/1.4812433

The effect of a paraffin screen on the neutron dose at the maze door of a 15 MV linear accelerator

2013· article· en· W2018337830 on OpenAlexaff
M. Krmar, Dejan Nikolić, A. Kuzmanović, Z. Kuzmanović, K. S. Ganezer

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for Nanotechnology
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsNeutronEquivalent doseDosimeterMaterials scienceNeutron fluxNeutron sourceNuclear medicinePhysicsDosimetryNuclear physicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of a paraffin screen located at various positions in the maze on the neutron dose equivalent at the maze door. METHODS: The neutron dose equivalent was measured at the maze door of a room containing a 15 MV linear accelerator for x-ray therapy. Measurements were performed for several positions of the paraffin screen covering only 27.5% of the cross-sectional area of the maze. The neutron dose equivalent was also measured at all screen positions. Two simple models of the neutron source were considered in which the first assumed that the source was the cross-sectional area at the inner entrance of the maze, radiating neutrons in an isotropic manner. In the second model the reduction in the neutron dose equivalent at the maze door due to the paraffin screen was considered to be a function of the mean values of the neutron fluence and energy at the screen. RESULTS: The results of this study indicate that the equivalent dose at the maze door was reduced by a factor of 3 through the use of a paraffin screen that was placed inside the maze. It was also determined that the contributions to the dosage from areas that were not covered by the paraffin screen as viewed from the dosimeter, were 2.5 times higher than the contributions from the covered areas. This study also concluded that the contributions of the maze walls, ceiling, and floor to the total neutron dose equivalent were an order of magnitude lower than those from the surface at the far end of the maze. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that a paraffin screen could be used to reduce the neutron dose equivalent at the maze door by a factor of 3. This paper also found that the reduction of the neutron dose equivalent was a linear function of the area covered by the maze screen and that the decrease in the dose at the maze door could be modeled as an exponential function of the product φ·E at the screen.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207