MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2020348237 · doi:10.1118/1.4740135

Poster — Thur Eve — 27: Scattering foil redesign for modulated electron radiotherapy

2012· article· en· W2020348237 on OpenAlexaff
Tanner Connell, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBremsstrahlungFOIL methodScatteringBeamlineIonization chamberMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Imaging phantomOpticsPhotonPercentage depth dose curveMonte Carlo methodDosimetryElectron scatteringAtomic physicsPhysicsIonizationNuclear medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work serves to build on existing work that discussed the advantages of removing the scattering foil from the beamline for modulated electron radiotherapy (MERT) much like flattening filter-free beams in photon IMRT. Due to concerns about the ability of the accelerators transmission ionization chamber to function normally with narrow, minimally-scattered beams as well as a limited maximum field size, this study focused on the design of a new custom scattering foil that was optimized for MERT applications. Different foil parameters such as material, thickness and shape were investigated to produce a minimally scattered beam, as opposed to a flat beam in the case of the clinical foil, while preserving the dosimetric benefits of a reduced thickness foil such as dramatically higher dose rate and reduced photon contamination in the bremsstrahlung tail. Using a Monte Carlo model that was verified against measured data, fluence profiles at the level of the transmission ionization chamber were produced and analyzed for all foil configurations, as well as PDDs and profiles in a water phantom. It was found that a simple foil of slab geometry made of low to medium Z material with the thickness determined by the maximum desirable field size and chosen electron energy produced a sufficiently scattered beam that maintained the dosimetric advantages of a scattering-foil-free beamline. These new foils, when applied to MERT, have the advantage of reducing treatment time due to higher dose rates and reducing dose to healthy tissue due to reduced dose in the bremsstrahlung tail.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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