MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035582555 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/19/5937

On the correction, perturbation and modification of small field detectors in relative dosimetry

2014· article· en· W2035582555 on OpenAlexafffund
Pavlos Papaconstadopoulos, Frédéric Tessier, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
FundersAlexander S. Onassis Public Benefit FoundationCompute Canada
KeywordsDosimetryDetectorPhysicsField (mathematics)Medical physicsComputational physicsOpticsNuclear medicineMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to derive a complete set of correction and perturbation factors for output factors (OF) and dose profiles. Modern small field detectors were investigated including a plastic scintillator (Exradin W1, SI), a liquid ionization chamber (microLion 31018, PTW), an unshielded diode (Exradin D1V, SI) and a synthetic diamond (microDiamond 60019, PTW). A Monte Carlo (MC) beam model was commissioned for use in small fields following two commissioning procedures: (1) using intermediate and moderately small fields (down to 2 × 2 cm(2)) and (2) using only small fields (0.5 × 0.5 cm(2) -2 × 2 cm(2)). In the latter case the detectors were explicitly modelled in the dose calculation. The commissioned model was used to derive the correction and perturbation factors with respect to a small point in water as suggested by the Alfonso formalism. In MC calculations the design of two detectors was modified in order to minimize or eliminate the corrections needed. The results of this study indicate that a commissioning process using large fields does not lead to an accurate estimation of the source size, even if a 2 × 2 cm(2) field is included. Furthermore, the detector should be explicitly modelled in the calculations. On the output factors, the scintillator W1 needed the smallest correction (+0.6%), followed by the microDiamond (+1.3%). Larger corrections were observed for the microLion (+2.4%) and diode D1V (-2.4%). On the profiles, significant corrections were observed out of the field on the gradient and tail regions. The scintillator needed the smallest corrections (-4%), followed by the microDiamond (-11%), diode D1V (+13%) and microLion (-15%). The major perturbations reported were due to volume averaging and high density materials that surround the active volumes. These effects presented opposite trends in both OF and profiles. By decreasing the radius of the microLion to 0.85 mm we could modify the volume averaging effect in order to achieve a discrepancy less than 1% for OF and 5% for profiles compared to water. Similar results were observed for the diode D1V if the radius was increased to 1 mm.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations108
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207