IMPACT OF TISSUE INHOMOGENEITY ON DOSE DISTRIBUTION IN THE CANINE CARPAL AND TARSAL REGIONS FOR COBALT AND 6 MV PHOTONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We quantified the effect of tissue inhomogeneity on dose distribution in a canine distal extremity resulting from treatment with cobalt photons and photons from a 6MV accelerator. Monitor units for a typical distal extremity treatment were calculated by two methods, using equally weighted, parallel-opposed fields. The first method was a computed tomography (CT)-based, computerized treatment plan, calculated without inhomogeneity correction. The second method was a manual point dose calculation to the isocenter. A computerized planning system was then used to assess the dose distribution achieved by these two methods when tissue inhomogeneity was taken into account. For cobalt photons, the median percentage of the planning target volume (PTV) that received < 95% of the prescribed dose was 4.5% for the CT-based treatment plan, and 26.2% for the manually calculated plan. For 6 MV photons, the median percentage of the PTV that received < 95% of the prescribed dose was < 1% for both planning methods. The PTV dose achieved without using inhomogeneity correction for cobalt photons results in potentially significant under dosing of portions of the PTV.
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".