MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105373836 · doi:10.1118/1.3267040

Low‐ target optimization for spatial resolution improvement in megavoltage imaging

2009· article· en· W2105373836 on OpenAlexaff
Tanner Connell, James L. Robar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersVarian Medical Systems
KeywordsLinear particle acceleratorMonte Carlo methodBerylliumPhysicsOpticsRange (aeronautics)Image resolutionDetectorLinear energy transferPhotonBeam (structure)ElectronAtomic numberOptical transfer functionRadiationMaterials scienceAtomic physicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Recently, several authors have shown contrast improvements in megavoltage portal imaging and cone-beam computed tomography using low atomic number (Z) targets. This work compliments previous studies by investigating the effects of varying different beam production parameters including target atomic number, target thickness, and incident electron energy on spatial resolution. METHODS: Target materials of beryllium, aluminum, and tungsten were investigated over a range of thicknesses between 10% and 100% of the continuous slowing down approximation range of electrons. Incident electron kinetic energies of 4.5 and 7.0 MeV were used, in conjunction with custom targets installed above the carousel of a modern radiotherapy linear accelerator. Monte Carlo simulations of the accelerator were constructed and compared to the experimental results. RESULTS: The results showed that thinner targets, as well higher incident electron energies, generally produce more favorable modulation transfer function (MTF) curves. Due to an MTF dependence of the detector system on the photon energy, the experimental results showed that low-Z targets produced superior MTF curves. Simulations showed 14.5% and 21.5% increases in f50 for the 7.0 and 4.5 MeV targets (A1; 60% R% CSDA), respectively, when moved from the carousel to the location of the clinical target. f50 values for the custom targets were compared to the clinical 6 MV beam and were found to be between 10.4% lower (4.5 MeV/W) and 15.5% higher (7.0 MeV/Be). CONCLUSIONS: Integration of low-Z external targets into the treatment head of a medical linear was achieved with only minor modifications. It was shown that reasonably high resolution images on par or better than those acquired with the clinical 6 MV beam can be achieved using external low-Z targets.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207