MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739512714 · doi:10.1097/hp.0000000000000693

Preliminary Determination of Activation Products for a Varian Truebeam Linear Accelerator

2017· article· en· W2739512714 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward Waller, Rohan Ram, Ian Steadman

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruebeamNuclear decommissioningLinear particle acceleratorComputer scienceRadiochemistryNuclear engineeringEnvironmental scienceNuclear physicsPhysicsNuclear medicineChemistryMedicineEngineeringOpticsBeam (structure)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical linear accelerators used to treat various forms of cancers are operated at a number of different energies. A by-product of the high-energy photons produced by accelerators is activation of components within the machine itself and its surrounding bunker. The activation products pose radiological and regulatory challenges during the operation of the accelerator as well as when it is time for final decommissioning. The Varian TrueBeam is a new state-of-the-art linear accelerator now operating in the Canadian market. There is currently limited information on the production of its activation products and the resulting impacts on operation and decommissioning. In this paper, activation products in the Varian TrueBeam accelerator are experimentally determined by performing gamma spectroscopy using a portable high purity germanium detector. A total of 10 isotopes are identified for the conditions tested, which include Na, Al, Mn, Ni, Cu, Cu, Br, Sb, Sb, W. The half-lives of these isotopes range from 2.3 min to 60.2 d. These preliminary results indicate that a decommissioning case similar to other radiotherapy accelerators can be made.

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)0.000
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 score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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