MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095351820 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/abf1bd

Comparative optic and dosimetric characterization of the HYPERSCINT scintillation dosimetry research platform for multipoint applications

2021· article· en· W3095351820 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsQuebec - Clinical Research Organization in CancerUniversité LavalCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de la SantéMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociaux
KeywordsDosimetryScintillatorScintillationDetectorLinearitySIGNAL (programming language)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Beam (structure)Spectrometer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces the HYPERSCINT research platform (HYPERSCINT-RP100, Medscint Inc., Quebec, Canada), the first commercially available scintillation dosimetry platform capable of multi-point dosimetry through the hyperspectral approach. Optic and dosimetric performances of the system were investigated through comparison with another commercially available solution, the Ocean Optics QE65Pro spectrometer. The optical characterization was accomplished by measuring the linearity of the signal as a function of integration time, photon detection efficiency and spectral resolution for both systems under the same conditions. Dosimetric performances were then evaluated with a 3-point plastic scintillator detector (mPSD) in terms of signal to noise ratio (SNR) and signal to background ratio (SBR) associated with each scintillator. The latter were subsequently compared with those found in the literature for the Exradin W1, a single-point plastic scintillator detector. Finally, various beam measurements were realized with the HYPERSCINT platform to evaluate its ability to perform clinical photon beam dosimetry. Both systems were found to be comparable in terms of linearity of the signal as a function of the intensity. Although the QE65Pro possesses a higher spectral resolution, the detection efficiency of the HYPERSCINT is up to 1000 time greater. Dosimetric measurements shows that the latter also offers a better SNR and SBR, surpassing even the SNR of the Exradin W1 single-point PSD. While doses ranging from 1 to 600 cGy were accurately measured within 2.1% of the predicted dose using the HYPERSCINT platform coupled to the mPSD, the Ocean optics spectrometer shows discrepancies up to 86% under 50cGy. Similarly, depth dose, full width at half maximum region of the beam profile and output factors were all accurately measured within 2.3% of the predicted dose using the HYPERSCINT platform and exhibit an average difference of 0.5%, 1.6% and 0.6%, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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