MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053910320 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/48/7/307

The clinical implementation of a method for calculating the output factor and per cent depth dose for an electron beam

2003· article· en· W2053910320 on OpenAlexafffund
D Choi, Paul Mobit, K. Breitman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsRADIUSCathode rayElectronBeam (structure)Field (mathematics)Point (geometry)Computational physicsOpticsFunction (biology)Insert (composites)PhysicsSeries (stratigraphy)Materials scienceGeometryComputer scienceMathematicsNuclear physicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A modified sector-integration method has been developed that predicts electron beam output factor at any point on the beam central axis, for a given source to surface distance (SSD), as a function of the geometry of the irradiated field. The main concept of this method is that with the arbitrary field shape divided into small sectors, the individual contributions from each sector can be calculated based on the sector radius, using a dataset consisting of circular inserts of standard radii. A computer program was developed based on this algorithm. The program interfaces to a digital camera that is used to capture the shape of the electron insert. We compared the calculated and the measured output factors and per cent depth doses (PDDs) at different SSDs for various rectangular inserts and a typical irregularly shaped insert used in our clinic. To determine the geometric limitations of this algorithm, a series of rectangular inserts were designed with the long-to-short axis ratio between 1:1 and 7:1. The agreement between calculation and measurement for the electron output and PDD was generally within 2% (or 2 mm) for energies from 6 to 20 MeV.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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