Characterization of calibration curves and energy dependence GafChromic<sup>TM</sup> XR-QA2 model based radiochromic film dosimetry system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The authors investigated the energy response of XR-QA2 GafChromic™ film over a broad energy range used in diagnostic radiology examinations. The authors also made an assessment of the most suitable functions for both reference and relative dose measurements. METHODS: Pieces of XR-QA2 film were irradiated to nine different values of air kerma in air, following reference calibration of a number of beam qualities ranging in HVLs from 0.16 to 8.25 mm Al, which corresponds to effective energy range from 12.7 keV to 56.3 keV. For each beam quality, the authors tested three functional forms (rational, linear exponential, and power) to assess the most suitable function by fitting the delivered air kerma in air as a function of film response in terms of reflectance change. The authors also introduced and tested a new parameter χ = netΔR·e(m netΔR) that linearizes the inherently nonlinear response of the film. RESULTS: The authors have found that in the energy range investigated, the response of the XR-QA2 based radiochromic film dosimetry system ranges from 0.222 to 0.420 in terms of netΔR at K(air)(air) = 8 cGy. For beam qualities commonly used in CT scanners (4.03-8.25 mm Al), the variation in film response (netΔR at K(air)(air) = 8 cGy) amounts to ± 5%, while variation in K(air)(air) amounts to ± 14%. CONCLUSIONS: Results of our investigation revealed that the use of XR-QA2 GafChromic™ film is accompanied by a rather pronounced energy dependent response for beam qualities used for x-ray based diagnostic imaging purposes. The authors also found that the most appropriate function for the reference radiochromic film dosimetry would be the power function, while for the relative dosimetry one may use the exponential response function that can be easily linearized.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".