MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dose rate properties of NIPAM-based x-ray CT polymer gel dosimeters

2015· article· en· W305538960 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Jirasek, H Johnston, Michelle Hilts

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDosimeterDose rateNuclear medicineX-rayRadiationMaterials sciencePercentage depth dose curveRadiation doseDosimetryMedicineOpticsPhysicsRadiochemistryChemistryIonization chamber

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work we investigate radiation dose rate dependencies of N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAM) based polymer gel dosimeters (PGDs) used in conjunction with x-ray computed tomography imaging for radiotherapy dose verification. We define four primary forms of dose rate variation: constant mean dose rate where beam on and beam off times both vary, variable mean dose rate where beam on time varies, variable mean dose rate where beam off time varies and machine dose rate (MU min(-1)). We utilize both small (20 mL) vials and large volume (1L) gel containers to identify and characterize dose rate dependence in NIPAM PGDs. Results indicate that all investigated constant and variable mean dose rates had negligible affect on PGD dose response with the exception of machine dose rates (100-600 MU min(-1)) which produced variations in dose response significantly lower than previously reported. Explanations of the reduced variability in dose response are given. It is also shown that NIPAM PGD dose response is not affected by variations in dose rate that may occur in modulated treatment deliveries. Finally, compositional changes in NIPAM PGDs are investigated as potential mitigating strategies for dose rate-dependent response variability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207