MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mathematical modelling of response of polymer gel dosimeters to brachytherapy radiation

2010· article· en· W2124258839 on OpenAlexaff
A T Nasr, J N M Chain, L J Schreiner, Kimberley B. McAuley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrachytherapyDosimetryPolymerDosimeterMaterials scienceImaging phantomPolyacrylamideBiomedical engineeringRadiochemistryNuclear medicineChemistryOpticsComposite materialRadiation therapyPolymer chemistryPhysicsMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A dynamic partial differential equation (PDE) model is used to simulate effects of a single Ir 192 brachytherapy seed on the amount and composition of polymer formed during polyacrylamide gel (PAG) dosimetry. Simulations are conducted for a point-source brachytherapy seed placed at the center of a 6%T 50% C anoxic PAG phantom. The seed is removed after one minute, but polymerization is simulated up to a final time of 24 hours. Simulation results indicate that changes occur in both the mass of polymer formed per unit dose and in the crosslink density as a function of the radial distance from the brachytherapy seed. For example, at a distance of 5 mm from the seed, 41 mg of polymer form per Gy of radiation absorbed (after 24 hours), whereas at a larger distance of 5 cm from the seed 75 mg of polymer form per Gy. The polymer that forms near the seed is predicted to have a higher level of crosslinking than the polymer that forms further away. These results suggest potential calibration problems that may occur during brachytherapy dosimetry using polymer gels.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207