Feasibility of operating a millimeter‐scale graphite calorimeter for absolute dosimetry of small‐field photon beams in the clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose To characterize and build a cylindrically layered graphite calorimeter the size of a thimble ionization chamber for absolute dosimetry of small fields. This detector has been designed in a familiar probe format to facilitate integration into the clinical workflow. The feasibility of operating this absorbed dose calorimeter in quasi‐adiabatic mode is assessed for high‐energy accelerator‐based photon beams. Methods This detector, herein referred to as Aerrow MK7, is a miniaturized version of a previously validated aerogel‐insulated graphite calorimeter known as Aerrow. The new model was designed and developed using numerical methods. Medium conversion factors from graphite to water, small‐field output correction factors, and layer perturbation factors for this dosimeter were calculated using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code system. A range of commercially available aerogel densities were studied for the insulating layers, and an optimal density was selected by minimizing the small‐field output correction factors. Heat exchange within the detector was simulated using a five‐body compartmental heat transfer model. In quasi‐adiabatic mode, the sensitive volume (a 3 mm diameter cylindrical graphite core) experiences a temperature rise during irradiation on the order of 1.3 mK·Gy−1. The absorbed dose is obtained by calculating the product of this temperature rise with the specific heat capacity of the graphite. The detector was irradiated with 6 MV ( = 63.5%) and 10 MV ( = 71.1%) flattening filter‐free (FFF) photon beams for two field sizes, characterized by dimensions of 2.16 and 11.0 cm. The dose readings were compared against a calibrated Exradin A1SL ionization chamber. All dose values are reported at in water. Results The field output correction factors for this dosimeter design were computed for field sizes ranging from = 0.54 to 11.0 cm. For all aerogel densities studied, these correction factors did not exceed 1.5%. The relative dose difference between the two dosimeters ranged between 0.3% and 0.7% for all beams and field sizes. The smallest field size experimentally investigated, = 2.16 cm, which was irradiated with the 10 MV FFF beam, produced readings of 84.4 cGy (±1.3%) in the calorimeter and 84.5 cGy (±1.3%) in the ionization chamber. Conclusion The median relative difference in absorbed dose values between a calibrated A1SL ionization chamber and the proposed novel graphite calorimeter was 0.6%. This preliminary experimental validation demonstrates that Aerrow MK7 is capable of accurate and reproducible absorbed dose measurements in quasi‐adiabatic mode.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".