MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151624501 · doi:10.1093/rpd/nci540

Angular and radial dependence of the energy response factor for LIF-TLD micro-rods in 125L permanent implant source

2006· article· en· W2151624501 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Mobit, Iulian Badragan

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRodThermoluminescent dosimeterMaterials scienceMonte Carlo methodOpticsThermoluminescenceIrradiationBrachytherapyPhysicsRadiationAtomic physicsDosimeterNuclear physicsRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulations were used to calculate the angular and radial dependence of the energy response factor for LiF-thermoluminescence dosemeters (TLDs) irradiated with a commercially available (125)I permanent brachytherapy source. The LiF-TLDs were modelled as cylindrical micro-rods of length 6 mm and with diameters of 1 mm and 5 mm. The results show that for a LiF-TLD micro-rod of 1 mm diameter, the energy response relative to (60)Co gamma rays is 1.406 +/- 0.3% for a polar angle of 90 degrees and radial distance of 1.0 cm. When the diameter of the micro-rod is increased from 1 to 5 mm, the energy response decreases to 1.32 +/- 0.3% at the same point. The variation with position of the energy response factor is not >5% in a 6 cm x 6 cm x 6 cm calculation grid for the 5 mm diameter micro-rod. The results show that there is a change in the photon spectrum with angle and radial distance, which causes the variation of the energy response.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207