MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3126542410 · doi:10.22215/clrp/epv2

Update of the CLRP eye plaque brachytherapy database for photon-emitting sources

2020· preprint· en· W3126542410 on OpenAlexafffund
Habib Safigholi, Zack Parsons, Stephen G. Deering, Rowan M. Thomson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCompute Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBrachytherapyDatabaseArtificial intelligenceMedicineRadiologyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 103 Pd or 125 I seeds (BrachyDose-computed, 2008).The new database, CLRP EPv2, consists of newlycalculated 3D dose distributions for 17 plaques [8 COMS, 5 Eckert & Ziegler BEBIG, and 4 others representative of models used worldwide] for 103 Pd, 125 I, and 131 Cs seeds.Acquisition and Validation Methods: Plaque models are developed with egs brachy, based on published/manufacturer dimensions and material data.The BEBIG plaques (modelled 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 centre of fullscatter water phantoms, scoring in (0.05 cm) 3 voxels spanning the eye for scenarios: (i) 'HOMO': simulated TG43 conditions; (ii) 'HETERO': eye plaques and seeds fully modelled; (iii) 'HETsi' (BEBIG only): one seed is active at a time with other seed geometries present but not emitting photons (inactive); summation over all i 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:

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.009

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→