MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance of latex balloons for optical computed tomography

2013· article· en· W2079389790 on OpenAlexafffund
K Jordan, Alexander C. Walsh, Mingsheng Peng, Jerry Battista

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMaterials scienceSelf-healing hydrogelsDosimeterNatural rubberTomographyComposite materialBiomedical engineeringOpticsRadiationPolymer chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latex balloons filled with radiation sensitive hydrogels were evaluated as 3D dosimeters with optical computed tomography (CT) readout. Custom balloons, with less than 10 cm diameters, were made from latex sheets. Commercial, 13 cm diameter, clear balloons were investigated for larger volumes. Ferrous-xylenol orange and genipin gelatin gels selected for 1 and 30 Gy experiments, respectively. The thin stretched latex membrane allowed optical imaging to within 1 mm of the interior balloon edge. Reconstructed dose distributions demonstrated valid measurements to within 2 mm of the balloon surface. The rubber membrane provides a hybrid approach to deforming hydrogels. Uniform irradiation of a deformed gel resulted in a uniform dose being measured when scanned in the relaxed, initial balloon shape. The 13 cm diameter balloons were also effective and inexpensive vessels for hydrogels due to their high clarity, thinness and mechanical strength. Latex balloons represent an inexpensive method to obtain useful information from nearly the entire dosimeter volume.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207