MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994795326 · doi:10.1002/acm2.12799

MOSFET dosimeter characterization in MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) Linac

2019· article· en· W2994795326 on OpenAlexaffabout
Poonam Yadav, A Hallil, D Tewatia, David A. P. Dunkerley, Bhudatt R. Paliwal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMedical Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear particle acceleratorDosimeterMedical physicsRadiation therapyNuclear medicineCharacterization (materials science)RadiationNuclear engineeringMedicineDosimetryPhysicsNuclear physicsOpticsEngineeringRadiologyBeam (structure)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose With the increasing use of MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT), it becomes important to understand and explore accuracy of medical dosimeters in the presence of magnetic field. The purpose of this work is to characterize metal‐oxide‐semiconductor field‐effect transistors (MOSFETs) in MRgRT systems at 0.345 T magnetic field strength. Methods A MOSFET dosimetry system, developed by Best Medical Canada for in‐vivo patient dosimetry, was used to study various commissioning tests performed on a MRgRT system, MRIdian ® Linac. We characterized the MOSFET dosimeter with different cable lengths by determining its calibration factor, monitor unit linearity, angular dependence, field size dependence, percentage depth dose (PDD) variation, output factor change, and intensity modulated radiation therapy quality assurance (IMRT QA) verification for several plans. MOSFET results were analyzed and compared with commissioning data and Monte Carlo calculations. Results MOSFET measurements were not found to be affected by the presence of 0.345 T magnetic field. Calibration factors were similar for different cable length dosimeters either placed at the parallel or perpendicular direction to the magnetic field, with variations of less than 2%. The detector showed good linearity (R 2 = 0.999) for 100–600 MUs range. Output factor measurements were consistent with ionization chamber data within 2.2%. MOSFET PDD measurements were found to be within 1% for 1–15 cm depth range in comparison to ionization chamber. MOSFET normalized angular response matched thermoluminescent detector (TLD) response within 5.5%. The IMRT QA verification data for the MRgRT linac showed that the percentage difference between ionization chamber and MOSFET was 0.91%, 2.05%, and 2.63%, respectively for liver, spine, and mediastinum. Conclusion MOSFET dosimeters are not affected by the 0.345 T magnetic field in MRgRT system. They showed physics parameters and performance comparable to TLD and ionization chamber; thus, they constitute an alternative to TLD for real‐time in‐vivo dosimetry in MRgRT procedures.

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)0.000
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 score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207