MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030018954 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/53/7/004

Characterizing the response of miniature scintillation detectors when irradiated with proton beams

2008· article· en· W2030018954 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
FundersNational Cancer InstituteUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHouston Endowment
KeywordsScintillationProtonDetectorIrradiationOpticsScintillation counterPhysicsNuclear physicsMaterials scienceMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Designing a plastic scintillation detector for proton radiation therapy requires careful consideration. Most of the plastic scintillators should not perturb a proton beam if they are sufficiently small but may exhibit some energy dependence due to the quenching effect. In this work, we studied the factors that would affect the performance of such scintillation detectors. We performed Monte Carlo simulations of proton beams with energies between 50 and 250 MeV to study signal amplitude, water equivalence, spatial resolution and quenching of light output. Implementation of the quenching effect in the Monte Carlo simulations was then compared with prior experimental data for validation. The signal amplitude of a plastic scintillating fiber detector was on the order of 300 photons per MeV of energy deposited in the detector, corresponding to a power of about 30 pW at a proton dose rate of 100 cGy min(-1). The signal amplitude could be increased by up to a factor of 2 with reflective coating. We also found that Cerenkov light was not a significant source of noise. Dose deposited in the plastic scintillator was within 2% of the dose deposited in a similar volume of water throughout the whole depth-dose curve for protons with energies higher than 50 MeV. A scintillation detector with a radius of 0.5 mm offers a sufficient spatial resolution for use with a proton beam of 100 MeV or more. The main disadvantage of plastic scintillators when irradiated by protons was the quenching effect, which reduced the amount of scintillation and resulted in dose underestimation by close to 30% at the Bragg peak for beams of 150 MeV or more. However, the level of quenching was nearly constant throughout the proximal half of the depth-dose curve for all proton energies considered. We therefore conclude that it is possible to construct an effective detector to overcome the problems traditionally encountered in proton dosimetry. Scintillation detectors could be used for surface or shallow measurements with a single calibration for specific beam energy. For deeper measurements, Monte Carlo simulations can be used to generate depth-dependent correction factors.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.223 · 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