MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033161480 · doi:10.1118/1.3098125

A method to improve accuracy and precision of water surface identification for photon depth dose measurementsa)

2009· article· en· W2033161480 on OpenAlexaff
James D. Ververs, Matthew Schaefer, I. Kawrakow, Jeffrey V. Siebers

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsInflection pointIonization chamberOffset (computer science)DosimetryPhotonMonte Carlo methodIonizationAccuracy and precisionPercentage depth dose curveOpticsComputational physicsPhysicsMathematicsNuclear medicineStatisticsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to present a method to reduce the setup error inherent in clinical depth dose measurements and, in doing so, to improve entrance dosimetry measurement reliability. Ionization chamber (IC) depth dose measurements are acquired with the depth scan extended into the air above the water surface. An inflection region is obtained in each resulting percent depth ionization (PDI) curve that can be matched against other measurements or to an inflection region obtained from an analogous Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. Measurements are made with various field sizes for the 6 and 18 MV photon beams, with and without a Pb foil in the beam, to determine the sensitivity of the dose inflection region to the beam conditions. The offset between reference and test data set inflection regions is quantified using two separate methods. When comparing sets of measured data, maxima in the second derivative of ionization are compared. When comparing measured data to MC simulation, the offset that minimizes the sum of squared differences between the reference and test curves in the ionization inflection region is found. These methods can be used to quantify the offset between an initial setup (test) position and the true surface (reference) position. The ionization inflection location is found to be insensitive to changes in field size, electron contamination, and beam energy. Data from a single reference condition should be sufficient to identify the surface location. The method of determining IC offsets is general and should be applicable to any IC and other radiation sources. The measurement method could reduce the time and effort required in the initial IC setup at a water surface as setup errors can be corrected offline. Given a reliable set of reference data to compare with, this method could increase the ability of quality assurance (QA) measurements to detect discrepancies in beam output as opposed to discrepancies in IC localization. Application of the measurement method standardizes the procedure for localizing cylindrical ICs at a water surface and thereby improves the reliability of measurements taken with these devices at all depths.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207