MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Uncertainty in 3D gel dosimetry

2015· article· en· W2047532160 on OpenAlex
Yves De Deene, Andrew Jirasek

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimetryDosimeterCalibrationImaging phantomVoxelMedical physicsMaterials scienceNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringOpticsComputer sciencePhysicsMedicineMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional (3D) gel dosimetry has a unique role to play in safeguarding conformal radiotherapy treatments as the technique can cover the full treatment chain and provides the radiation oncologist with the integrated dose distribution in 3D. It can also be applied to benchmark new treatment strategies such as image guided and tracking radiotherapy techniques. A major obstacle that has hindered the wider dissemination of gel dosimetry in radiotherapy centres is a lack of confidence in the reliability of the measured dose distribution. Uncertainties in 3D dosimeters are attributed to both dosimeter properties and scanning performance. In polymer gel dosimetry with MRI readout, discrepancies in dose response of large polymer gel dosimeters versus small calibration phantoms have been reported which can lead to significant inaccuracies in the dose maps. The sources of error in polymer gel dosimetry with MRI readout are well understood and it has been demonstrated that with a carefully designed scanning protocol, the overall uncertainty in absolute dose that can currently be obtained falls within 5% on an individual voxel basis, for a minimum voxel size of 5 mm(3). However, several research groups have chosen to use polymer gel dosimetry in a relative manner by normalizing the dose distribution towards an internal reference dose within the gel dosimeter phantom. 3D dosimetry with optical scanning has also been mostly applied in a relative way, although in principle absolute calibration is possible. As the optical absorption in 3D dosimeters is less dependent on temperature it can be expected that the achievable accuracy is higher with optical CT. The precision in optical scanning of 3D dosimeters depends to a large extend on the performance of the detector. 3D dosimetry with X-ray CT readout is a low contrast imaging modality for polymer gel dosimetry. Sources of error in x-ray CT polymer gel dosimetry (XCT) are currently under investigation and include inherent limitations in dosimeter homogeneity, imaging performance, and errors induced through post-acquisition processing. This overview highlights a number of aspects relating to uncertainties in polymer gel dosimetry.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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