Dosimetric Evaluation and Verification of External Beam 3-D Treatment Plans in Humanoid Phantom Using Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dosimetric Evaluation & Verification Of External Beam 3-D Treatment Plans In Humanoid Phantom have been carried out. In this study male anthromorphic phantom, model no.702 D, manufactured by Atom Ltd has been used. The plan was delivered to phantom and TLD- 100 was placed in cavities to evaluate and verify the dose delivered by implementing 3D treatment plans. TLD 100 was calibrated using SIEMENS PRIMUS PLUS Linear Accelerator with calibrated 6 MV X ray beam. We chose phantom skull, abdomen and pelvis region for making treatment plans and then doses by treatment plans have been verified by TLDs. 4%, 3.5% and 3% variation in the results was found for skull, pelvis and abdomen region respectively which is within the safe limit of accuracy i-e from 3% to 5 %. Before working with TLDs, it has also been found that thermoluminescent dosimeters were showing the linear response and results are reproducible for the dose range from 50 cGy to 200 cGy. This study has been performed at Karachi Institute of Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine (KIRAN) during the year 2010-2011.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".