MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055210663 · doi:10.1118/1.2965360

An EGSnrc Monte Carlo‐calculated database of TG‐43 parameters

2008· article· en· W2055210663 on OpenAlexafffund
R. E. P. Taylor, D. W. O. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodDosimetryBrachytherapyComputational physicsData setPhysicsPhotonComputer scienceAnisotropyAlgorithmMedical physicsStatistical physicsDatabaseNuclear medicineStatisticsMathematicsOpticsArtificial intelligenceRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo methods are used to calculate a complete TG-43 dosimetry parameter data set for 27 low-energy photon emitting brachytherapy sources (18 125I and 9 l03Pd). All Monte Carlo calculations are performed using the EGSnrc user-code BrachyDose. TG-43 dosimetry parameters, including dose rate constants, radial dose functions (with functional fitting parameters), and anisotropy data, are calculated with finer spatial resolution, greater range of distances, and smaller uncertainties than data currently available in the literature for many of these sources. In particular, for most of the seeds, this is the first time that anisotropy data have been tabulated at distances less than 0.5 cm from the source. These calculations employ the state-of-the-art XCOM photon cross sections, and detailed source geometries are modeled using Yegin's multigeometry package. This data set serves as a completely independent verification of the currently available dosimetry parameters calculated using other Monte Carlo codes, including MCNP and PTRAN. This report also describes the Carleton Laboratory for Radiotherapy Physics TG-43 Parameter Database, a publicly accessible web site (at http://www.physics.carleton.ca/clrp/seed_database/) through which all of the data calculated for this study can be accessed. Also available on the web site are descriptions of the methods and Monte Carlo models used in this study and comparisons of data calculated in this study with data calculated by other authors.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.010

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations136
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207