Monte Carlo calculations of , the beam quality conversion factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To use EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulations to directly calculate beam quality conversion factors, kQ, for 32 cylindrical ionization chambers over a range of beam qualities and to quantify the effect of systematic uncertainties on Monte Carlo calculations of kQ. These factors are required to use the TG-51 or TRS-398 clinical dosimetry protocols for calibrating external radiotherapy beams. METHODS: Ionization chambers are modeled either from blueprints or manufacturers' user's manuals. The dose-to-air in the chamber is calculated using the EGSnrc user-code egs_chamber using 11 different tabulated clinical photon spectra for the incident beams. The dose to a small volume of water is also calculated in the absence of the chamber at the midpoint of the chamber on its central axis. Using a simple equation, kQ is calculated from these quantities under the assumption that W/e is constant with energy and compared to TG-51 protocol and measured values. RESULTS: Polynomial fits to the Monte Carlo calculated kQ factors as a function of beam quality expressed as %dd(10)x and TPR10(20) are given for each ionization chamber. Differences are explained between Monte Carlo calculated values and values from the TG-51 protocol or calculated using the computer program used for TG-51 calculations. Systematic uncertainties in calculated kQ values are analyzed and amount to a maximum of one standard deviation uncertainty of 0.99% if one assumes that photon cross-section uncertainties are uncorrelated and 0.63% if they are assumed correlated. The largest components of the uncertainty are the constancy of W/e and the uncertainty in the cross-section for photons in water. CONCLUSIONS: It is now possible to calculate kQ directly using Monte Carlo simulations. Monte Carlo calculations for most ionization chambers give results which are comparable to TG-51 values. Discrepancies can be explained using individual Monte Carlo calculations of various correction factors which are more accurate than previously used values. For small ionization chambers with central electrodes composed of high-Z materials, the effect of the central electrode is much larger than that for the aluminum electrodes in Farmer chambers.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".