Sci‐Sat AM: Radiation Dosimetry and Practical Therapy Solutions ‐ 03: Energy dependence of a clinical probe‐format calorimeter and its pertinence to absolute photon and electron beam dosimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the intrinsic and absorbed‐dose energy dependence of a small‐scale graphite calorimeter probe (GPC) developed for use as a routine clinical dosimeter. The influence of charge deposition on the response of the GPC was also assessed by performing absolute dosimetry in clinical linac‐based electron beams. Methods: Intrinsic energy dependence was determined by performing constant‐temperature calorimetry dose measurements in a water‐equivalent solid phantom, under otherwise reference conditions, in five high‐energy photon (63.5 < %dd(10)X < 76.3), and five electron (2.3 cm < R50 < 8.3 cm) beams. Reference dosimetry was performed for all beams in question using an Exradin A19 ion chamber with a calibration traceable to national standards. The absorbed‐dose component of the overall energy dependence was calculated using the EGSnrc egs_chamber user code. Results: A total of 72 measurements were performed with the GPC, resulting in a standard error on the mean absorbed dose of better than 0.3 % for all ten beams. For both the photon and electron beams, no statistically‐significant energy dependence was observed experimentally. Peak‐to‐peak, variations in the relative response of the GPC across all beam qualities of a given radiation type were on the order of 1 %. No effects, either transient or permanent, were attributable to the charge deposited by the electron beams. Conclusions: The GPC's apparent energy‐independence, combined with its well‐established linearity and dose rate independence, make it a potentially useful dosimetry system capable measuring photon and electron doses in absolute terms at the clinical level.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".