MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2308962765 · doi:10.1118/1.4829577

Monte Carlo calculations for reference dosimetry of electron beams with the PTW Roos and NE2571 ion chambers

2013· article· en· W2308962765 on OpenAlexafffund
Bryan Muir, D. W. O. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDosimetryIonization chamberMonte Carlo methodLaser beam qualityIonCollimated lightAbsorbed doseBeam (structure)Atomic physicsElectronPhysicsPercentage depth dose curveComputational physicsMaterials scienceOpticsNuclear physicsNuclear medicineRadiationIonizationMathematicsLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate recommendations for reference dosimetry of electron beams and gradient effects for the NE2571 chamber and to provide beam quality conversion factors using Monte Carlo simulations of the PTW Roos and NE2571 ion chambers. METHODS: The EGSnrc code system is used to calculate the absorbed dose-to-water and the dose to the gas in fully modeled ion chambers as a function of depth in water. Electron beams are modeled using realistic accelerator simulations as well as beams modeled as collimated point sources from realistic electron beam spectra or monoenergetic electrons. Beam quality conversion factors are calculated with ratios of the doses to water and to the air in the ion chamber in electron beams and a cobalt-60 reference field. The overall ion chamber correction factor is studied using calculations of water-to-air stopping power ratios. RESULTS: The use of an effective point of measurement shift of 1.55 mm from the front face of the PTW Roos chamber, which places the point of measurement inside the chamber cavity, minimizes the difference between R50, the beam quality specifier, calculated from chamber simulations compared to that obtained using depth-dose calculations in water. A similar shift minimizes the variation of the overall ion chamber correction factor with depth to the practical range and reduces the root-mean-square deviation of a fit to calculated beam quality conversion factors at the reference depth as a function of R50. Similarly, an upstream shift of 0.34 rcav allows a more accurate determination of R50 from NE2571 chamber calculations and reduces the variation of the overall ion chamber correction factor with depth. The determination of the gradient correction using a shift of 0.22 rcav optimizes the root-mean-square deviation of a fit to calculated beam quality conversion factors if all beams investigated are considered. However, if only clinical beams are considered, a good fit to results for beam quality conversion factors is obtained without explicitly correcting for gradient effects. The inadequacy of R50 to uniquely specify beam quality for the accurate selection of kQ factors is discussed. Systematic uncertainties in beam quality conversion factors are analyzed for the NE2571 chamber and amount to between 0.4% and 1.2% depending on assumptions used. CONCLUSIONS: The calculated beam quality conversion factors for the PTW Roos chamber obtained here are in good agreement with literature data. These results characterize the use of an NE2571 ion chamber for reference dosimetry of electron beams even in low-energy 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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations31
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207