Monte Carlo dosimetric characterization of a new high dose rate Yb brachytherapy source and independent verification using a multipoint plastic scintillator detector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose A prototype Yb source was developed in combination with a dynamic rotating platinum shield system (AIM‐Brachy) to deliver intensity modulated brachytherapy (IMBT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric characteristics of the bare/shielded Yb source using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations and perform an independent dose verification using a dosimetry platform based on a multipoint plastic scintillator detector (mPSD). Methods The TG‐43U1 dosimetric parameters were calculated for the source model using RapidBrachyMCTPS. Real‐time dose rate measurements were performed in a water tank for both the bare/shielded source using a custom remote afterloader. For each dwell position, the dose rate was independently measured by the three scintillators (BCF‐10, BCF‐12, and BCF‐60). For the bare source, dose rate was measured at distances up to 3 cm away from the source over a range of 7 cm along the catheter. For the shielded source, measurements were performed with the mPSD placed at 1 cm from the source at four different azimuthal angles ( , 9 , 18 , and 27 ). Results The dosimetric parameters were tabulated for the source model. For the bare source, differences between measured and calculated along‐away dose rates were generally below 5–10%. Along the transverse axis, deviations were, on average (range), 3.3% (0.6–6.2%) for BCF‐10, 1.7% (0.9–2.9%) for BCF‐12, and 2.2% (0.3–4.4%) for BCF‐60. The maximum dose rate reduction due to shielding at a radial distance of 1 cm was 88.8 ± 1.2%, compared to 83.5 ± 0.5% as calculated by MC. Conclusions The dose distribution for the bare/shielded Yb source was independently verified using mPSD with good agreement in regions close to the source. The Yb source coupled with the partial‐shielding system is an effective technique to deliver IMBT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".