MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113687011 · doi:10.1118/1.3676185

A novel technique to enable experimental validation of deformable dose accumulation

2012· article· en· W2113687011 on OpenAlexafffund
Carolyn Niu, Warren D. Foltz, Michael Velec, Joanne Moseley, Adil Al‐Mayah, Kristy K. Brock

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of TorontoNational Cancer InstituteCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsDosimeterMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringIsocenterPenetration (warfare)DosimetryDose profileNuclear medicineImaging phantomMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To propose a novel technique to experimentally validate deformable dose algorithms by measuring 3D dose distributions under the condition of deformation using deformable gel dosimeters produced by a novel gel fabrication method. METHOD: Five gel dosimeters, two rigid control gels and three deformable gels, were manufactured and treated with the same conformal plan that prescribed 400 cGy to the isocenter. The control gels were treated statically; the deformable gels were treated while being compressed by an actuation device to simulate breathing motion (amplitude of compression = 1, 1.5, and 2 cm, respectively; frequency = 16 rpm). Comparison between the dose measured by the control gels and the corresponding static dose distribution calculated in the treatment planning system (TPS) has determined the intrinsic dose measurement uncertainty of the gel dosimeters. Doses accumulated using MORFEUS, a biomechanical model-based deformable registration and dose accumulation algorithm, were compared with the doses measured by the deformable gel dosimeters to verify the accuracy of MORFEUS using dose differences at each voxel as well as the gamma index test. Flexible plastic wraps were used to contain and protect the deformable gels from oxygen infiltration, which inhibits the gels' dose sensitizing ability. Since the wraps were imperfect oxygen barrier, dose comparison between MORFEUS and the deformable gels was performed only in the central region with a received dose of 200 cGy or above to exclude the peripheral region where oxygen penetration had likely affected dose measurements. RESULTS: Dose measured with the control gels showed that the intrinsic dose measurement uncertainty of the gel dosimeters was 11.8 cGy or 4.7% compared to the TPS. The absolute mean voxel-by-voxel dose difference between the accumulated dose and the dose measured with the deformable gels was 4.7 cGy (SD = 36.0 cGy) or 1.5% (SD = 13.4%) for the three deformable gels. The absolute mean vector distance between the 250, 300, 350, and 400 cGy isodose surfaces on the accumulated and measured distributions was 1.2 mm (SD < 1.5 mm). The gamma index test that used the dose measurement precision of the control gels as the dose difference criterion and 2 mm as the distance criterion was performed, and the average pass rate of the accumulated dose distributions for all three deformable gels was 92.7%. When the distance criterion was relaxed to 3 mm, the average pass rate increased to 96.9%. CONCLUSION: This study has proposed a novel technique to manufacture deformable volumetric gel dosimeters. By comparing the doses accumulated in MORFEUS and the doses measured with the dosimeters under the condition of deformation, the study has also demonstrated the potential of using deformable gel dosimetry to experimentally validate algorithms that include deformations into dose computation. Since dose less than 200 cGy was not evaluated in this study, future investigations will focus more on low dose regions by either using bigger gel dosimeters or prescribing a lower dose to provide a more complete experimental validation of MORFEUS across a wider dose range.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 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

Citations76
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207