Update of the CLRP eye plaque brachytherapy database for photon‐emitting sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To update and extend the Carleton Laboratory for Radiotherapy Physics (CLRP) Eye Plaque (EP) dosimetry database for low‐energy photon‐emitting brachytherapy sources using egs_brachy, an open‐source EGSnrc application. The previous database, CLRP_EPv1, contained datasets for the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) plaques (10–22 mm diameter) with 103Pd or 125I seeds (BrachyDose‐computed, 2008). The new database, CLRP_EPv2, consists of newly calculated three‐dimensional (3D) dose distributions for 17 plaques [eight COMS, five Eckert & Ziegler BEBIG, and four others representative of models used worldwide] for 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs seeds. Acquisition and validation methods Plaque models are developed with egs_brachy, based on published/manufacturer dimensions and material data. The BEBIG plaques (modeled for the first time) are identical in dimensions to COMS plaques but differ in elemental composition and/or density. Previously benchmarked seed models are used. Eye plaques and seeds are simulated at the center of full‐scatter water phantoms, scoring in (0.05 cm)3 voxels spanning the eye for scenarios: (a) “HOMO”: simulated TG43 conditions; (b) “HETERO”: eye plaques and seeds fully modeled; (c) “HETsi” (BEBIG only): one seed is active at a time with other seed geometries present but not emitting photons (inactive); summation over all seeds in a plaque then yields “HETsum” (includes interseed effects). For validation, doses are compared to those from CLRP_EPv1 and published data. Data format and access Data are available at https://physics.carleton.ca/clrp/eye_plaque_v2 , http://doi.org/10.22215/clrp/EPv2 . The data consist of 3D dose distributions (text‐based EGSnrc “3ddose” file format) and graphical presentations of the comparisons to previously published data. Potential applications The CLRP_EPv2 database provides accurate reference 3D dose distributions to advance ocular brachytherapy dose evaluations. The fully‐benchmarked eye plaque models will be freely distributed with egs_brachy, supporting adoption of model‐based dose evaluations as recommended by TG‐129, TG‐186, and TG‐221.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
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".