MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624876714 · doi:10.1002/mp.12405

Technical Note: Ion chamber angular dependence in a magnetic field

2017· article· en· W2624876714 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Reynolds, S Rathee, B. G. Fallone

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsIonization chamberMonte Carlo methodMagnetic fieldPhysicsDetectorComputational physicsBeam (structure)IonizationOrientation (vector space)OpticsPhotonAtomic physicsIonGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: There have been several studies investigating dose deposition effects within radiation detectors in the presence of a magnetic field. However, to date there has only been a passing investigation which explicitly investigates detector dose-response as a function of detector orientation. Herein we will investigate the dose-response as a function angular orientation of a PR06C ionization chamber. We will also benchmark the Monte Carlo code PENELOPE with the newly developed magnetic field Fano test. METHODS: The PENELOPE Monte Carlo package was used to simulate a PR06C ionization chamber in 0.35 T through 1.5 T magnetic fields oriented either parallel or orthogonal to an incident 6 MV radiation beam. The ionization chamber was rotated through a number of polar and azimuthal angles. The dose deposited within the chamber at each angular position and magnetic field strength was scored then normalized to that deposited in the same orientation with no magnetic field. The simulation was also benchmarked via a Fano test in magnetic field. RESULTS: The Fano test yielded a 0.4% difference between simulation and expected result, which is similar to previous findings and sufficient for the purposes of this study. The angular dose-response map in all cases where the magnetic field is oriented orthogonal to the radiation beam is quite varied and can range from 0.89 to 1.08. Angular deviations as small as 3° can lead to dose-response changes in excess of 1%. When the magnetic field is parallel to the photon beam, the angular dose-response map is homogeneous and less than 1% below 1.0 T. CONCLUSIONS: Within a magnetic field-oriented orthogonal to the radiation beam, the ionization chamber dose-response fluctuates greatly as a function of polar and azimuthal angle, where a parallel field yields a more homogeneous dose-response.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207