Time-resolved dosimetric verification of respiratory-gated radiotherapy exposures using a high-resolution 2D ionisation chamber array
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this work was to track and verify the delivery of respiratory-gated irradiations, performed with three versions of TrueBeam linac, using a novel phantom arrangement that combined the OCTAVIUS(®) SRS 1000 array with a moving platform. The platform was programmed to generate sinusoidal motion of the array. This motion was tracked using the real-time position management (RPM) system and four amplitude gating options were employed to interrupt MV beam delivery when the platform was not located within set limits. Time-resolved spatial information extracted from analysis of x-ray fluences measured by the array was compared to the programmed motion of the platform and to the trace recorded by the RPM system during the delivery of the x-ray field. Temporal data recorded by the phantom and the RPM system were validated against trajectory log files, recorded by the linac during the irradiation, as well as oscilloscope waveforms recorded from the linac target signal. Gamma analysis was employed to compare time-integrated 2D x-ray dose fluences with theoretical fluences derived from the probability density function for each of the gating settings applied, where gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm, 1%/1 mm and 0.5%/0.5 mm were used to evaluate the limitations of the RPM system. Excellent agreement was observed in the analysis of spatial information extracted from the SRS 1000 array measurements. Comparisons of the average platform position with the expected position indicated absolute deviations of <0.5 mm for all four gating settings. Differences were observed when comparing time-resolved beam-on data stored in the RPM files and trajectory logs to the true target signal waveforms. Trajectory log files underestimated the cycle time between consecutive beam-on windows by 10.0 ± 0.8 ms. All measured fluences achieved 100% pass-rates using gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm and 50% of the fluences achieved pass-rates >90% when criteria of 0.5%/0.5 mm were used. Results using this novel phantom arrangement indicate that the RPM system is capable of accurately gating x-ray exposure during the delivery of a fixed-field treatment beam.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".