Application of plastic scintillating fibres to surface dosimetry in megavoltage photon and electron beams: considerations for Cerenkov correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work investigated the application of plastic scintillation detectors (PSDs) in dosimetry measurements on the surface of a phantom in megavoltage photon and electron beams. Emission spectra associated with fluorescence in the PMMA optical fibre, Cerenkov in the optical fibre, and the signal from the scintillator were characterized with a spectrophotometer. The angular dependence of the PSD response was studied with the PSD both in the plane and perpendicular to the plane of gantry rotation. Two methods of stem correction were investigated: stem subtraction and full spectral correction. It was found that with the PSD in the plane of gantry rotation, the stem subtraction method overestimates the dose particularly in electrons. The magnitude of overestimation is dependent on the beam energy, scintillator type and the angle of incidence. In this study a maximum error of 12% was observed for 16 MeV with a gantry angle of 45°. It was shown that the cause of this error was a non-negligible emission of Cerenkov radiation from the scintillator itself. This error was not observed when the PSD was oriented perpendicular to the plane of rotation. Similarly, the full spectral method was effective in isolating the scintillation-only signal regardless of PSD orientation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".