MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766354236 · doi:10.1002/acm2.12210

Time‐resolved diode dosimetry calibration through Monte Carlo modeling for <i>in vivo</i> passive scattered proton therapy range verification

2017· article· en· W2766354236 on OpenAlexaff
Allison Toltz, Michaela A.U. Hoesl, Jan Schuemann, Jan Seuntjens, Hsiao‐Ming Lu, Harald Paganetti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodDetectorProton therapyCalibrationBragg peakDosimetryBeam (structure)OpticsDosimeterRange (aeronautics)Ionization chamberPhysicsProtonMaterials scienceNuclear medicineRadiationNuclear physicsMathematicsIonizationMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Our group previously introduced an in vivo proton range verification methodology in which a silicon diode array system is used to correlate the dose rate profile per range modulation wheel cycle of the detector signal to the water-equivalent path length (WEPL) for passively scattered proton beam delivery. The implementation of this system requires a set of calibration data to establish a beam-specific response to WEPL fit for the selected 'scout' beam (a 1 cm overshoot of the predicted detector depth with a dose of 4 cGy) in water-equivalent plastic. This necessitates a separate set of measurements for every 'scout' beam that may be appropriate to the clinical case. The current study demonstrates the use of Monte Carlo simulations for calibration of the time-resolved diode dosimetry technique. METHODS: Measurements for three 'scout' beams were compared against simulated detector response with Monte Carlo methods using the Tool for Particle Simulation (TOPAS). The 'scout' beams were then applied in the simulation environment to simulated water-equivalent plastic, a CT of water-equivalent plastic, and a patient CT data set to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Simulated detector response in water-equivalent plastic was validated against measurements for 'scout' spread out Bragg peaks of range 10 cm, 15 cm, and 21 cm (168 MeV, 177 MeV, and 210 MeV) to within 3.4 mm for all beams, and to within 1 mm in the region where the detector is expected to lie. CONCLUSION: Feasibility has been shown for performing the calibration of the detector response for three 'scout' beams through simulation for the time-resolved diode dosimetry technique in passive scattered proton delivery.

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)0.001
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 score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207