MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283702562 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/ac7c92

Mean Arc Distance (MAD): a quantity to compare trajectory 4 <i>π</i> sampling in single target cranial stereotactic radiotherapy

2022· article· en· W4283702562 on OpenAlexaff
R Lee MacDonald, John Lincoln, Cody Church, Christopher G. Thomas, Alasdair Syme

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear medicineMathematicsSampling (signal processing)TrajectoryRadiation treatment planningMetric (unit)IsocenterVolume (thermodynamics)Radiation therapyMedicineImaging phantomComputer scienceSurgeryComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose. C-arm linac-based radiotherapy has seen a recent interest in 4 π methods of delivery using simultaneous rotations of couch and gantry to reduce doses to organs-at-risk (OARs) and increase dose compactness. While many methods use heuristics to generate trajectories that avoid OARs, combined with arbitrary trajectory restrictions to prevent oversampling, a quantity has not yet been developed to succinctly compare sampling of the 4 π space for candidate trajectories as a surrogate for dosimetric compactness. Methods. Evenly spaced sampling points were distributed across a 4 π sphere centred on isocentre. A metric, mean arc distance (MAD), was defined that quantifies the average arc distance between all sampling points and their nearest field in a radiotherapy trajectory. The relationship between isodose volume and MAD was examined in 2,047 plans: 900 unique trajectories of fixed port DCA plans, 900 unique trajectories of contiguous field DCA plans, 192 VMAT plans (eight volumes in four locations, each with six trajectories) in matRad with 5 VMAT plans repeated for validation in a clinical planning system, and 10 clinical VMAT cases replanned with five trajectories in a clinical treatment planning system. Results. All isodose volumes greater than 10% of the prescription dose decreased with decreasing MAD in all comparisons. In the range of 10% to 100% of the prescription dose, the rate of isodose volume decrease was exponential as a function of MAD in all comparisons. Reduction of absolute isodose volume is seen with increased 4 π sampling, with larger target volumes exhibiting larger absolute reductions. Very low isodoses (0% to 10% of prescription) increased with decreasing MAD. Conclusions. MAD is a 4 π sampling quantity useful in quantifying the decrease of isodose volume, relevant for sparing normal tissues. By quantifying this feature, candidate dynamic trajectories can be efficiently compared for 4 π sampling. This quantity is explored here for single target cranial radiotherapy but may have applications to other radiotherapy treatment sites.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207