MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2086740674 · doi:10.1118/1.3181548

SU‐FF‐T‐75: Importance of Contamination Signal Removal On HDR Brachytherapy In Vivo Dosimetry When Using a Scintillating Fiber Dosimeter

2009· article· en· W2086740674 on OpenAlexaff
François Therriault‐Proulx, Mathieu Guillot, L Gingras, Luc Beaulieu, Sam Beddar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScintillatorDosimeterOpticsScintillationDetectorDosimetrySIGNAL (programming language)Optical fiberImaging phantomScintillation counterBrachytherapyPhysicsMaterials scienceParticle detectorNuclear medicineRadiationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To quantify the importance of removing the contamination signal, composed of Cerenkov and fluorescence light, from the output of an in vivo scintillating fiber dosimeter during Iridium‐192 HDR brachytherapy treatments. Method and Materials: The scintillating fiber dosimetry system is composed of a miniature monochrome CCD camera (Apogee Alta U‐4000) detecting light from optical fibers. Two fibers were used for the purpose of this study: one of those had a 3 mm x 1 mm cylindrical scintillator (BCF‐60) coupled to its extremity. Integrating light coming out from both fibers under the same irradiation conditions allows, following proper calibration, to determine the scintillation and the contamination components of the detector signal. This study has been conducted in a solid water phantom. Components of the detector signal have been studied as a function of angular, longitudinal and radial position of the Ir‐192 source with respect to the detecting volume (i.e. scintillator). Results: The contamination component ranged from 4% to 42% of the detector signal, depending on the relative source to scintillator and fiber positions. The highest ratio was obtained when the source was the closest to the scintillator. The lowest was obtained when the source is longitudinally the furthest from the source. The ratio increased from 4% to 10% with the source going from 1cm to 5cm on the radial axis of the scintillator. Angular study reveals that both contamination and scintillation components of the signal varies under 3.4 percents over the complete angles range. Conclusion: Dose determination is proportional to the amount of scintillating light measured. Based on our measurements, the necessity of removing the contamination component of the signal is obvious to obtain an accurate dose calculation. Any scintillating fiber dosimeter for in vivo brachytherapy dosimetry should then include an efficient removal technique of the contamination signal.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→