MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886058089 · doi:10.4236/ti.2018.93011

A Novel Method to Verify Gamma Knife Radioactive Source Count

2018· article· en· W2886058089 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hsein-Tang Tu, Cheng‐Siu Chang, Chun‐Yi Chuang, Cheng‐Wei Huang, Wei-Jr Li, Tzu‐Chin Wu, Fu-Yu Feng, Zih-Ping Ho, Chuanfu Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorRadioactive sourceMaterials scienceMargin (machine learning)Computer scienceRadiationNuclear engineeringOpticsEnvironmental sciencePhysicsDetectorEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Regulation requires periodic reconfirmation of the number of radioactive sources in Gamma Knife (GK). To comply with regulations, the total dose output (TDO) method, originally designed to verify amount of radiation received by patients, was adopted as a tool for source security. However, we suspect the TDO method may be unreliable in detecting small numbers of missing sources given that a 2% margin of error is allowed. We propose an alternate method using Gafchromic films to identify number of sources present. Method: To test the efficacy of the TDO method, we simulated real-life source loss by plugging up to 5 sources. TDO after plugging 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 sources were measured using GK 4C. Percentage change for each additional source plugged was computed. We then proceeded to test the film method. For GK 4C, 2 Gafchromic RTQA2 single sided films measuring 10 × 10 inch were first halved to 5 × 10 inch films. Four 5 × 10 inch films were then adhered to the inner surface of the 18 mm collimator. For GK Perfexion, 2 Gafchromic EBT3 double sided films measuring 10 × 12 inches were combined and rolled into a cone film and adhered to the collimator during installation. In both cases, the films were exposed to 0.5 Gy. Results: TDO was inversely related to the number of source plugged. TDO decreased by more than 2% after 5 plugs. The film method was able to outline all 201 and 192 Co sources for GK4Cand Perfexion respectively. Conclusion: A single lost source is hard to detect using the TDO method given that at least 5 sources had to be lost before the change in TDO will exceed the margin of error (±2%). The film method bypasses this limitation and offers an easy alternative to accurately obtain the number of sources.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207