Sci‐AM1 Sat ‐ 09: Embolization materials affect subsequent radiosurgery dose to AVM's
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiosurgery, often used as a follow‐up modality to surgical glue embolization for arterio‐venous‐malformations (AVM's), can be complicated by the polymerizing and contrast agents, Embucrilate and Lipiodol. Post the embolization attempt, these agents remain in the AVM nidus where they depart radiologically from tissue equivalence and thereby affect dose. A test phantom consisting of an array of deposits of embolization medium of both varying thickness and polymer / contrast concentration imbedded in solid water was constructed. For irradiation, the phantom is further imbedded in solid water at positions upstream and downstream relative to a fixed nominal target / film plane at 100 cm SAD (overall phantom thickness: 22cm; film depth: 7.0 cm.) The film placement relative to the glue media interfaces are upstream: −0.2 and 0.0 cm; and downstream: 0.0, 0.2, and 0.5 cm. Irradiations are conducted using a 5 MV radiosurgery beam (Linac system) in a wide (10 cm × 10 cm) SAD‐field setting to encompass the phantom's glue wells. Correspondence of results with narrower coned RS fields was verified. XV film results indicated dose downstream of the interface at 0.0, 0.2, and 0.5 cm was reduced 14% (±3%), 7% (±2%), and 2% (±1%) respectively. The Lipiodol concentrations, (80%, 50%, 20% by weight) reduced maximum dose 16% (±1%), 15% (±1%), and 10% (±1%) respectively. Glue depth and thickness yielded little relative dose effect. Radiation transport calculations and radiochromic film results will also be presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".