MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032820816 · doi:10.1118/1.598962

A practical technique for verification of three‐dimensional conformal dose distributions in stereotactic radiosurgery

2000· article· en· W2032820816 on OpenAlexaff
James L. Robar, B. G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgeryImaging phantomDICOMMonte Carlo methodConformal mapNuclear medicinePixelDosimetryMedical imagingOpticsPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsRadiation therapyMedicineRadiologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend toward conformal techniques in stereotactic radiosurgery necessitates an accurate and practical method for verification of irregular three-dimensional dose distributions. This work presents the design and evaluation of a phantom system facilitating the measurement of conformal dose distributions using one or more arrays of up to 20 radiographic films separated by 3.2 mm-thick tissue-equivalent spacers. Using Electron Gamma Shower version 4 (EGS4) Monte Carlo simulation, we show that for 6 MV radiosurgical photon beams this arrangement preserves tissue-equivalence to within 1%. The phantom provides 0.25 mm in-plane spatial resolution and multiple sets of films may be used to resample the dose volume in orthogonal planes. Dedicated software has been developed to automate the process of ordering and orienting of scanned film images, conversion of scanned pixel value to dose, resampling of one or more sets of film images and subsequent export of images in DICOM format for coregistration of planned and measured dose volumes. Calculated and measured isodose surfaces for a simple, circular-beam treatment agree to within 1.5 mm throughout the dose volume. For conformal radiosurgical applications, the measured and planned dose distributions agree to within the uncertainty of the manufacture of irregularly shaped collimators. The sensitivity of this technique to minor spatial inaccuracies in beam shaping is also demonstrated.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207