3D source tracking and error detection in HDR using two independent scintillator dosimetry systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to perform three-dimensional (3D) source position reconstruction by combining in vivo dosimetry measurements from two independent detector systems. METHODS: Ir source using two detector systems. The first was based on three plastic scintillator detectors and the second on a single inorganic crystal (CsI:Tl). Brachytherapy treatments were simulated in water under TG-43U1 conditions, including a HDR prostate plan. Treatment needles were placed in distances covering a range of source movement of 120 mm around the detectors. The distance from each dwell position to each scintillator was determined based on the measured dose rates. The three distances given by the mPSD were recalculated to a position along the catheter (z) and a distance radially away from the mPSD (xy) for each dwell position (a circumference around the mPSD). The source x, y, and z coordinates were derived from the intersection of the mPSD's circumference with the sphere around the ISD based on the distance to this detector. We evaluated the accuracy of the source position reconstruction as a function of the distance to the source, the most likely location for detector positioning within a prostate volume, as well as the capacity to detect positioning errors. RESULTS: Approximately 4000 source dwell positions were tracked for eight different HDR plans. An intersection of the mPSD torus and the ISD sphere was observed in 77.2% of the dwell positions, assuming no uncertainty in the dose rate determined distance. This increased to 100% if 1σ search regions were added. However, only 73(96)% of the expected dwell positions were found within the intersection band for 1(2) σ uncertainties. The agreement between the source's reconstructed and expected positions was within 3 mm for a range of distances to the source up to 50 mm. The experiments on a HDR prostate plan, showed that by having at least one of the detectors located in the middle of the prostate volume, reduces the measurement deviations considerably compared to scenarios where the detectors were located outside of the prostate volume. The analysis showed a detection probability that, in most cases, is far from the random detection threshold. Errors of 1(2) mm can be detected in ranges of 5-25 (25-50) mm from the source, with a true detection probability rate higher than 80%, while the false probability rate is kept below 20%. CONCLUSIONS: By combining two detector responses, we enabled the determination of the absolute source coordinates. The combination of the mPSD and the ISD in vivo dosimetry constitutes a promising alternative for real-time 3D source tracking in HDR brachytherapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".