A theoretical framework to predict the most likely ion path in particle imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, a generic rigorous Bayesian formalism is introduced to predict the most likely path of any ion crossing a medium between two detection points. The path is predicted based on a combination of the particle scattering in the material and measurements of its initial and final position, direction and energy. The path estimate's precision is compared to the Monte Carlo simulated path. Every ion from hydrogen to carbon is simulated in two scenarios, (1) where the range is fixed and (2) where the initial velocity is fixed. In the scenario where the range is kept constant, the maximal root-mean-square error between the estimated path and the Monte Carlo path drops significantly between the proton path estimate (0.50 mm) and the helium path estimate (0.18 mm), but less so up to the carbon path estimate (0.09 mm). However, this scenario is identified as the configuration that maximizes the dose while minimizing the path resolution. In the scenario where the initial velocity is fixed, the maximal root-mean-square error between the estimated path and the Monte Carlo path drops significantly between the proton path estimate (0.29 mm) and the helium path estimate (0.09 mm) but increases for heavier ions up to carbon (0.12 mm). As a result, helium is found to be the particle with the most accurate path estimate for the lowest dose, potentially leading to tomographic images of higher spatial resolution.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".