Killing Two Birds with One Stone: A Dosimetric Study of Dual Target Radiosurgery Using a Single Isocenter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The treatment of hematogenous brain metastases is a frequent indication for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). It is common for more than one metastasis to be treated during the same SRS session. We retrospectively identified four cases where our m3 micro multileaf collimator (mMLC) was used to create two distinct apertures and treat adjacent lesions using a single isocenter. For these four cases, single isocenter plans with static conformal beams were dosimetrically compared to plans utilizing two isocenters with static conformal beams or conformal arcs. The effects on dose homogeneity, dose conformity, and the minimum isodose separating the two targets are minor and variable. On the other hand, the use of a single isocenter technique consistently halves delivery time and decreases the integral dose to normal tissue. For small adjacent metastases, which can simultaneously be encompassed within the high-resolution portion of the m3/Novalis mMLC collimator, the use of a single rather than a dual isocenter technique is feasible and generally advantageous.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".