MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2055571083 · doi:10.1118/1.3612332

SU‐E‐T‐378: Radiochromic Film Based Reference Dosimetry System for 192Ir Brachytherapy Sources

2011· article· en· W2055571083 on OpenAlexaffabout
Saad Aldelaijan, Huriyyah Mohammed, Nada Tomic, L Liang, F DeBlois, Arman Sarfehnia, W Abdel‐Rahman, Jan Seuntjens, Slobodan Dević

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimetryBrachytherapyMonte Carlo methodMaterials scienceCalibrationHomogeneity (statistics)Absorbed doseRadiationNuclear medicineDose profileOpticsPhysicsComputer scienceRadiation therapyMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Comparison between radiochromic film reference dosimetry system calibration curves established in water and Solid Water(TM) for high dose rate (HDR) 192‐Iridium brachytherapy source is described and assessed. Accordingly, a new reference dosimetry system protocol for HDR 192‐Iridium using the latest EBT‐2 model GAFCHROMIC(TM) film is suggested. Methods: Calibration curves were established in water and Solid Water(TM) using pieces of EBT‐2 GAFCHROMIC(TM) film irradiated with HDR 192‐Iridium brachytherapy source for a dose range from 0 to 50 Gy. A parallel‐opposed beam setup was specially designed to allow the positioning of the HDR source into two channels (catheters) with the film piece positioned mid‐way between them. This setup increases the dose homogeneity region over the film piece and reduces the positional uncertainty with respect to the radiation source. Responses of dosimetry systems were compared for irradiations in water and Solid Water(TM) by scaling the dose between media through Monte Carlo‐calculated conversion factor simulated for the two setups.Results: Monte Carlo calculated conversion factor, which converts dose delivered to the sensitive layer of the film in water to a dose delivered to the sensitive layer of the film in Solid Water(TM), was found to be 0.9941±0.0007. The EBT‐2 GAFCHROMIC(TM) film based reference dosimetry system described in this work can provide an overall one‐sigma uncertainty in measured dose of 2% for doses above 1 Gy Conclusions: Experimental confirmation of the Monte Carlo‐calculated factor that shows dose difference between measurements in water and Solid Water(TM) was provided. The remaining 0.6% difference between measurements in both media shows that Solid Water(TM) is a viable alternative to water as a reference medium in establishing the calibration curve at 192‐Iridium energy. Response curves utilizing green color channel only has shown superior precision if used alone in dosimetry for dose range that extends up to 50 Gy. This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada contract No. 386009. Saad Aldelaijan would like to acknowledge Saudi Food & Drug Authority for financial support during his graduate studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→