MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200437778 · doi:10.3390/s21238139

Medical Range Radiation Dosimeter Based on Polymer-Embedded Fiber Bragg Gratings

2021· article· en· W4200437778 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie‐Anne Lebel‐Cormier, Tommy Boilard, Martin Bernier, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDosimeterMaterials scienceDosimetryPolymerOptical fiberOpticsFiber Bragg gratingRadiationOptoelectronicsComposite materialNuclear medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fiber Bragg gratings (FBGs) are valuable dosimeters for doses up to 100 kilograys (kGy), but have hardly been used for the low-dose range of a few grays (Gy) required in medical radiation dosimetry. We report that embedding a doped silica fiber FBG in a polymer material allows a minimum detectable dose of 0.3 Gy for γ-radiation. Comparing the detector response for different doped silica fibers with various core doping, we obtain an independent response, in opposition to what is reported for high-dose range. We hypothesized that the sensor detection is based on the radio-induced thermal expansion of the surrounding polymer. Hence, we used a simple physical model based on the thermal and mechanical properties of the surrounding polymer and obtained good accordance between measured and calculated values for different compositions and thicknesses. We report that over the 4 embedding polymers tested, polyether ether ketone and polypropylene have respectively the lowest (0.056 pm/Gy) and largest sensitivity (0.087 pm/Gy). Such FBG-based dosimeters have the potential to be distributed along the fiber to allow multipoint detection while having a sub-millimeter size that could prove very useful for low-dose applications, in particular for radiotherapy dosimetry.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207