Assessment of two hemispherical and hemispherical-conical miniature sources used in electronic brachytherapy using Monte Carlo Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Since the heart of the electronic brachytherapy system is a tube of a miniature x-ray and due to the increasing use of electronic brachytherapy, there is an urgent need for acquiring knowledge about the X-ray spectrum produced, and distribution of x-ray dose. This study aimed to assess the optimal target thickness (TT), the X-ray source spectrum, and the absorbed dose of two miniature sources of hemispherical and hemispherical-conical used in electronic brachytherapy systems, through a Monte Carlo simulation. METHODS: Considering the advantages of MCNPX Code (2.6.0), two input files corresponding to the characteristics of the investigated miniature sources were prepared for this code and then were used for simulation. The optimal thickness (OT) of gold and tungsten targets was determined for the energy levels of 40, 45, and 50 kilo-electron-volts. RESULTS: In this study, the values of the size of the optimal thickness of 0.92, 1.01 and 1.06 μ for gold target and values of 0.99, 1.08 and 1.34 μ for tungsten target were obtained for energies 40, 45 and 50 keV that using these values, the optimum thickness of 0.92, X-ray spectrum within and outside targets, axial and radial doses for the used energy were calculated for two miniature sources. CONCLUSION: It was found that the energy of incident electron, target shape, cross-sectional area of the produced bremsstrahlung, atomic number of materials constituting of the target and output window are the factors with the greatest impacts on the produced X-ray spectrum and the absorbed dose.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".