MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134483155 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq482

Mega-voltage versus kilo-voltage cone beam CT used in image guided radiation therapy: comparative study of microdosimetric properties

2010· article· en· W2134483155 on OpenAlex
Yue Qiu, I A Popescu, Cheryl Duzenli, Vitali Moiseenko

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodCone beam computed tomographyPhysicsNuclear medicineRadiationImage qualityTomotherapyPhotonBeam (structure)VoltageMaterials scienceRadiation therapyOpticsMedical physicsComputed tomographyMedicineRadiologyComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mega-voltage computed tomography (MVCT) and kilo-voltage cone beam CT (CBCT) are routinely used in image-guided radiation therapy. In current practice, doses from MVCT and CBCT are reported with no correction for radiation quality. In this study, we compared microdosimetric properties as well as doses for MVCT and CBCT. Monte Carlo simulation codes BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc were used to simulate a Varian CBCT 125 kVp photon beam and primary electron spectra for CT sets of two patients. The revised Oak Ridge Electron transport Code (NOREC) was used to simulate electron tracks in liquid water. C++ code was developed to compute lineal energy in a sphere of 1 μm diameter. Dose-mean lineal energy-based quality factors were calculated for critical organs in-field. The estimated quality factor for CBCT is up to a factor of 1.3 times that of MV beams.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.275 · 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