MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791810062 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/aab0db

Evaluating the biological impact of increased scattered radiation in single and composite field radiation beams

2018· article· en· W2791810062 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBeam (structure)RadiationOpticsLinear particle acceleratorPhotonField (mathematics)Materials scienceIrradiationPhase (matter)PhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Low energy scattered particles cause the average energy at the treatment field edge to be lower relative to the center of the beam. These particles have a higher LET, making them more biologically damaging. With a single beam (large field-size (FS)), the amount of these highly damaging electrons is low relative to within the treatment beam. However, when multiple beam angles and smaller FS are used (IMRT/VMAT), the relative contribution of scattered radiation increases and biological consequences may vary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the theoretical impact of increased scattered radiation in single and composite field beams. Monte Carlo Geant4.10.3 was used to score the electron energy spectra at different depths in water with a 6 MV photon beam incident. The energy spectra were then used to calculate the maximum RBE, RBE M . Beams examined were phase-spaces of a Varian Clinac 600C 6 MV linac (10 × 10 cm 2 beam, 1 × 1 cm 2 beam), and a composite 10 × 10 cm 2 beam. The composite 10 × 10 cm 2 treatment field (simple IMRT) was created by summating one hundred 1 × 1 cm 2 beams to form a relatively uniform 10 × 10 cm 2 field. For smaller FS (1.5 cm depth), an increase in RBE M was seen 5.2 cm outside the beam (17%). The 10 × 10 cm 2 beam showed an increase of 14%, 9.2 cm away from beam’s edge (1.5 cm depth). The composite 10 × 10 cm 2 beam exhibited similar RBE M enhancement to the 10 × 10 cm 2 phase-space, however, the region of increased damage occurred closer to the beam (5.6 cm away). The results indicate that although the region inside the primary beam is not affected, the contribution of damaging particles happens much closer to the beam’s edge in the composite field case relative to an open field. This may have potential implications regarding the effective dose to organs at risk during radiotherapy.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.306 · 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