SU‐E‐T‐127: Two Dosimetric Methods of Measuring Linac Beam Spot Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Two dosimetric methods of measuring the electron beam spot position of photon beams w.r.t. the Collimator Axis Of Rotation (CAOR) are described. Methods: Method 1 (SNG test) uses a cylindrical ion chamber (IC) (A1SL) in a phantom mounted on a jig co‐rotational with the collimator making the relationship among the chamber, phantom, jaws and CAOR fixed and independent of collimator angle. A jaw parallel to the IC axis is set to zero and the phantom adjusted so the IC signal is 65% of the open field value. cGy/mu is measured every 30 degrees of collimator rotation. The phantom is then translated normal to the IC axis until the signal is 35%. The shift is recorded to calculate sensitivity (%dose/mm). For a radially symmetric spot centred on CAOR, the IC signal is angularly constant. Deviation from constant indicates a displacement from the CAOR and a shape distortion. The displacement and spot shape are calculated using Fourier analysis and penumbra shape (sensitivity). The 2nd method uses a hard wedge instead of the jaw and sensitivity is obtained from wedge profiles. Test measurements were performed on an Elekta 6 MV: the In Plane beam spot position was measured before and after it was moved by changing bending magnet current (Bending Fine). Results: Independent beam spot measurement (Flexmap Image Registration) showed the initial beam spot, projected back to source, 0.29 mm from CAOR, moving to 0.91 mm (delta=0.62 mm) with steering. The SNG test reported the beam spot moving from 0.13mm to 0.92 mm from CAOR (delta=0.79 mm). The hard wedge test gave an initial position of 0.09 mm off axis and a final position of 0.79 mm (delta=0.7 mm) Conclusions: The methods described provide a quantitative measure of beam spot position, not requiring the user to independently define the CAOR. Jason Smale is an Employee of Elekta Canada
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".