Dosimetric effects on the penumbra region of irregular multi-leaf collimated fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dosimetric effect in the penumbra region for multi-leaf collimator (MLC) fields was studied using a Varian 21 EX linear accelerator. The beam profiles in the cross-line and in-line directions for MLC field configurations of varying lengths of protruded leaves, which are adjacent (on one or both sides) to the beam profile axes, were measured using a 6 MV photon beam. It was found that there is a decrease of dose in the 'edge' region of the protruded leaves' side in the cross-line profile, when the protruded leaves (upper and/or lower side) were moved out from 0.5 cm to 3 cm towards the central beam axis. When both the upper and lower portions of leaves were moved out forming a gap for the profile, the dose at the 'edge' region in the cross-line direction was decreased by about 20% and 6%, with the protruded length of leaves being 0.5 cm and 1 cm, respectively. The penumbra width of the cross-line profile increased with the protruded length of leaves when the gap width was 0.5 cm, and it was independent of the length when the width was increased larger than 1 cm. The Pinnacle treatment planning system could calculate the decrease of dose observed experimentally in the cross-line profile, but an underestimation of about 30% was found when using version 6.2b, which did not consider the leaf rounded end and tongue-and-groove effect. While the newly commissioned 7.4f, which considered the two aforementioned effects, made an improvement, it still underestimated the dose by 25% compared to the measurement. For the in-line profiles, both versions estimated the penumbra width well.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".