Angular dependence of the output of a kilovoltage X‐ray therapy unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the recommissioning of a Philips RT-250 kilovoltage X-ray unit, unexpected output variations with tube head rotation (cross-plane) and tube head tilt (in-plane) were observed. The measured output showed an increase of up to 7.3% relative to the neutral position (0? in-plane and 0? cross-plane) over the possible range of angles of in-plane rotation for 75 kVp (half-value layer, HVL = 1.84 mm Al). A less pronounced but noticeable output change (with respect to the neutral position) was observed for cross-plane rotation reaching 2% for the 225 kVp beam (HVL = 0.90 mm Cu). This output variation was observed while manually adjusting the current to maintain constancy according to the current meter gauge. In order to address the observed output dependence with head orientation, the dose rate monitor chamber of the kilovoltage unit was calibrated to monitor the beam output in real time. The dose rate was manually adjusted to maintain a constant dose rate (in r/min) as displayed on the r/min gauge. This approach resulted in maintaining beam output for the 75 kVp and the 225 kVp beams within +/- 2% for the in-plane angle variation and +/- 0.5% for the cross-plane angle variation. A daily output check that includes ion chamber-based measurements at the neutral position and an in-plane angle of 45? has been implemented using the constant dose rate approach to monitor the stability of the X-ray beams. As a result of the output variations with in/cross-plane rotation, the quality control (QC) procedures that are typically used for clinical setup have been modified to test the stability of the beams under the non-neutral positioning of the X-ray tube.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".