Absorption spectra time evolution of EBT‐2 model GAFCHROMIC™ film
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: One of the major drawbacks of the current radiochromic film dosimetry protocols is the postirradiation waiting time. In this article, the authors study the postirradiation time evolution of the absorption spectrum of radiochromic EBT-2 GAFCHROMIC film model. METHODS: Postirradiation scanning times range from 3 min to 5 days and a dose range extends from 0 to 6 Gy. The authors compare the results of absorption spectra measurements for the latest GAFCHROMIC EBT-2 film model to the absorption spectra of the previous EBT GAFCHROMIC film model. The authors also describe a method that can establish the time error constraints on the postirradiation scanning time that will still provide an acceptable dose error for clinical applications if the protocol employing the shorter postirradiation scanning time is implemented in the clinic. RESULTS: The two film models experience the very same dose change in net absorbance with sensitivity of the latest EBT-2 model GAFCHROMIC film being slightly lower than its predecessor. The authors show that for two postirradiation scanning times of 30 min and 24 h, the 1% dose error can be achieved if the scanning time window is less than +/- 5 min and +/- 2 h, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By comparing the resultant change in net absorbance between the latest EBT-2 and previous EBT GAFCHROMIC film models, the authors conclude that the addition of the yellow marker dye to the sensitive layer does not affect dosimetric properties of the latest film model. The authors also describe a procedure by which one can establish an acceptable time window around chosen postirradiation scanning time protocol that would provide an acceptable dose error for practical purposes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".