Preliminary Dose Calibration Results Using a TENOMAG Polymer Gel Dosimeter and Optical CT (VISTA<sup>TM</sup>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a preliminary result of dose calibration for 3D dose evaluation using gel dosimetry in radiotherapy. In this work, we measured the percentage depth dose (PDD) and dose linearity using a normoxic polymer gel dosimeter (TENOMAG) and a commercial cone-beam optical CT scanner (VISTA TM , Modus Medical Devices, Inc., London, ON, Canada). We confirmed that the PDD measured for 1 and 2 Gy had a build up region at 0.4 cm depth. However, the PDD measured for 3 and 4 Gy had not a build up region. In all cases, the PDD has not greatly decreased with depth above 4 cm depth. Moreover we confirmed that the optical density proportionally increased with dose at 1, 1.5 and 2 cm depth, while the response has not greatly increased with dose for other depths. In this study, we confirmed that we will be able to perform the dose calibration using optical density obtained from a TENOMAG gel data scanned with an optical CT scanner.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".