MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3121210514 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ac1ca1

Deformable scintillation dosimeter I: challenges and implementation using computer vision techniques

2021· article· en· W3121210514 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScintillationDosimeterSIGNAL (programming language)Tracking (education)ScintillatorDetectorGaussianPosition (finance)Context (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plastic scintillation detectors are increasingly used to measure dose distributions in the context of radiotherapy treatments. Their water-equivalence, real-time response and high spatial resolution distinguish them from traditional detectors, especially in complex irradiation geometries. Their range of applications could be further extended by embedding scintillators in a deformable matrix mimicking anatomical changes. In this work, we characterized signal variations arising from the translation and rotation of scintillating fibers with respect to a camera. Corrections are proposed using stereo vision techniques and two sCMOS complementing a CCD camera. The study was extended to the case of a prototype real-time deformable dosimeter comprising an array of 19 scintillating fibers. The signal to angle relationship follows a gaussian distribution (FWHM = 52°) whereas the intensity variation from radial displacement follows the inverse square law. Tracking the position and angle of the fibers enabled the correction of these spatial dependencies. The detecting system provides an accuracy and precision of respectively 0.08 mm and 0.3 mm on the position detection. This resulted in an uncertainty of 2° on the angle measurement. Displacing the dosimeter by ±3 cm in depth resulted in relative intensities of 100 ± 10% (mean ± standard deviation) to the reference position. Applying corrections reduced the variations thus resulting in relative intensities of 100 ± 1%. Similarly, for lateral displacements of ±3 cm, intensities went from 98 ± 3% to 100 ± 1% after the correction. Therefore, accurate correction of the signal collected by a camera imaging the output of scintillating elements in a 3D volume is possible. This work paves the way to the development of real-time scintillator-based deformable dosimeters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→