Development of an advanced two‐dimensional microdosimetric detector based on <scp>TH</scp>ick Gas Electron Multipliers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The THick Gas Electron Multiplier (THGEM)-based tissue-equivalent proportional counter (TEPC) has been proven to be useful for microdosimetry due to its flexibility in varying the gaseous sensitive volume and achieving high multiplication gain. Aiming at measuring the spatial distribution of radiation dose for mixed neutron-gamma fields, an advanced two-dimensional (2D) THGEM-TEPC was designed and constructed at McMaster University which will enable us to overcome the operational limitation of the classical TEPCs, particularly for high-dose rate fields. Compared to the traditional TEPCs, anode wire electrodes were replaced by a THGEM layer, which not only enhances the gas multiplication gain but also offers a flexible and convenient fabrication for building 2D detectors. METHOD & MATERIALS: The 2D THGEM TEPC consists of an array of 3 × 3 sensitive volumes, equivalent to nine individual TEPCs, each of which has a dimension of 5 mm diameter and length. Taking the overall cost, size and flexibility into account, to process nine detector signals simultaneously, a multi-input digital pulse processing system was developed by using modern microcontrollers, each of which is coupled with a 12-bit sampling ADC. RESULTS: Li(p,n) accelerator neutron source, both fundamental detector performance, as well as neutron dosimetric response of the 2D THGEM-TEPC, has been extensively investigated and compared to the data acquired by a standard spherical TEPC. It was shown that the microdosimetric response and the measured absorbed dose rate of the 2D THGEM detector developed in this study are comparable to the standard 1/2" TEPC which is commercially available. CONCLUSION: This study proved that the 2D TEPC based on the THGEM technology can be effectively used in microdosimetry studies and is a promising detector for measuring the absorbed dose rate distribution over an area in mixed radiation fields. This unique small gas cavity detector opens new possibilities in applications for high-intensity mixed radiation fields as well as in nanodosimetry.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".