MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084948545 · doi:10.1118/1.2966348

Quantifying the effect of off‐focal radiation on the output of kilovoltage x‐ray systems

2008· article· en· W2084948545 on OpenAlexafffund
Elsayed Ali, D. W. O. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsOpticsFocal lengthFocal pointCardinal pointCollimated lightX-ray tubeAnodeRadiationPhysicsElectronBackscatter (email)Materials scienceLens (geology)Nuclear physicsElectrodeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a typical x-ray tube, off-focal radiation is mainly generated by the backscattered electrons that reenter the anode outside the focal spot. In this study, BEAMnrc (an EGSnrc user-code) is modified to simulate off-focal radiation. The modified BEAMnrc code is used to study the characteristics of electrons that backscatter from the anode, and to quantify their effect on the output of typical x-ray systems. Results show that the first generation backscatter coefficient is approximately 50% for tungsten anodes at diagnostic energies, and approximately 38% for molybdenum anodes at mammography energies. Second and higher generations of backscatter have a relatively minor contribution. At the patient plane, our simulation results are in excellent agreement with experimental measurements in the literature for the spectral shape of both the primary and the off-focal components, and also for the integral off-focal-to-primary ratio. The spectrum of the off-focal component at the patient plane is softer than the primary, which causes a slight softening in the overall spectrum. For typical x-ray systems, the off-focal component increases patient exposure (for a given number of incident primary electrons) by up to 11% and reduces the half-value layer and the effective energy of the average spectrum by up to 7% and 3%, respectively. The larger effects are for grounded cathode tubes, smaller interelectrode distance, higher tube voltage, lighter filtration, and less collimation. Simulation time increases by approximately 30% when the off-focal radiation is included, but the overall simulation time remains of the order of a few minutes. This study concludes that the off-focal radiation can have a non-negligible effect on the output parameters of x-ray systems and that it should be included in x-ray tube simulations for more realistic modeling of these systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207