MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049177464 · doi:10.1118/1.3058481

An energy fluence‐convolution model for amorphous silicon EPID dose prediction

2009· article· en· W2049177464 on OpenAlexaff
Peter B. Greer, Patrick Cadman, Christopher Lee, K Bzdusek

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Cancer Agency
FundersCancer Council NSW
KeywordsImage-guided radiation therapyOpticsMultileaf collimatorBackscatter (email)FluenceDosimetryMedical imagingCalibrationImage resolutionMaterials sciencePhysicsNuclear medicineLinear particle acceleratorBeam (structure)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicineLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (a-Si EPID) dose prediction model based on the energy fluence model of the Pinnacle treatment planning system Version 7 (Philips Medical Systems, Madison, WI) is developed. An energy fluence matrix at very high resolution (< 1 mm) is used to incorporate multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf effects in the predicted EPID images. The primary dose deposited in the EPID is calculated from the energy fluence using experimentally derived radially dependent EPID interaction coefficients. Separate coefficients are used for the open beam energy fluence component and the component of the energy fluence transmitted through closed MLC leaves to each EPID pixel. A spatially invariant EPID dose deposition kernel that describes both radiative dose deposition, central axis EPID backscatter, and optical glare is convolved with the primary dose. The kernel is further optimized to give accurate EPID penumbra prediction and EPID scatter factor with changing MLC field size. An EPID calibration method was developed to reduce the effect of nonuniform backscatter from the support arm (E-arm) in a calibrated EPID image. This method removes the backscatter component from the pixel sensitivity (flood field) correction matrix retaining only field-specific backscatter in the images. The model was compared to EPID images for jaw and MLC defined open fields and eight head and neck intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) fields. For the head and neck IMRT fields with 2%, 2 mm criteria 97.6 +/- 0.6% (mean +/- 1 standard deviation) of points passed with a gamma index less than 1, and for 3%, 3 mm 99.4 +/- 0.4% of points were within the criteria. For these fields, the 2%, 2 mm pass score reduced to 96.0 +/- 1.5% when backscatter was present in the pixel sensitivity correction matrix. The model incorporates the effect of MLC leaf transmission, EPID response to open and MLC leakage dose components, and accurately predicts EPID images of IMRT fields. Removing the backscatter component of the pixel sensitivity matrix correction reduces the effect of nonuniform E-arm backscatter.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207