MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2766012318 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aa954c

Small composite field correction factors for the CyberKnife radiosurgery system: clinical and PCSR plans

2017· article· en· W2766012318 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Christiansen, Bryan Muir, Jason Bélec, Eric Vandervoort

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalMcGill University
FundersAccuray
KeywordsCollimatorScintillatorPhysicsDosimeterCyberknifeRadiosurgeryTest planFormalism (music)Radiation treatment planningDetectorMedical physicsNuclear medicineComputer scienceOpticsRadiationMathematicsStatisticsMedicineRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A formalism has been proposed for small and non-standard photon fields in which [Formula: see text] correction factors are used to correct dosimeter response in small fields (indiviual or composite) relative to that in a larger machine-specific reference (MSR) field. For clinical plans consisting of several fields, a plan-class specific reference (PCSR) plan can also be defined, serving as an intermediate calibration field between the MSR and clinical plans within a certain plan-class. In this work, the formalism was applied in the calculation of [Formula: see text] for 21 clinical plans delivered by the [Formula: see text] radiosurgery system, each plan employing one or two of the smallest diameter collimators: 5 mm, 7.5 mm, and 10 mm. Three detectors were considered: the Exradin A16 and A26 micro chambers, and the W1 plastic scintillator. The clinical plans were grouped into 7 plan-classes according to commonly shared characteristics. The suitability of using a PCSR plan to represent the detector response of each plan within the plan-class was investigated. Total and intermediate correction factors were calculated using the [Formula: see text] Monte Carlo user code. The corrections for the micro chambers were large, primarily due to the presence of the low-density air cavity and the volume averaging effect. The correction for the scintillator was found to be close to unity for most plans, indicating that this detector may be used to measure small clinical plan correction factors in any plan except for those using the 5 mm collimator. The PCSR plan was shown to be applicable to plan-classes comprising isocentric plans only, with plan-classes divided according to collimator size. For non-isocentric plans, the variation of [Formula: see text] as a function of the point of measurement within a single plan, as well as the high inter-plan-class variability of the correction factor, precludes the use of a PCSR plan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→