MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294215213 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/ac8e72

A customizable, open-source Winston-Lutz system for multi-target, single isocentre radiotherapy

2022· article· en· W4294215213 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorIsocenterImaging phantomQuality assuranceComputer scienceSoftwareLinear particle acceleratorNuclear medicineArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMathematicsOpticsMedicinePhysicsBeam (structure)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective . To present and share an open-source system (phantom and software) for verifying the targeting accuracy of linac-based, single-isocenter, multi-target radiotherapy. This quality assurance test extends the traditional Winston-Lutz test, which considers a single target located at isocentre. Approach . Plans for a 3D-printed phantom are provided, which can be customized to accommodate various target (BB) positions. Given BB positions and gantry/collimator/couch combinations, the software generates multi-leaf collimator positions to facilitate multi-target Winston-Lutz (MTWL) plan creation. The software determines deviations between detected and expected BB positions on MV images resulting from MTWL plan delivery. BBs are located using a Hough circle detection algorithm, which is modified to favour the detection of circles: (1) having a reasonable size, (2) that are contained within the radiation field, and (3) having reasonable pixel intensities. Validation was performed in two ways: (1) using synthetic data with zero targeting errors and (2) by measuring real linac targeting errors and comparing against results obtained using a commercial system. Main results . Validation using the synthetic data yielded a mean (maximum) absolute discrepancy of 0.11 mm (0.21 mm), which is comparable to the synthetic phantom resolution (0.2 mm). The mean (maximum) absolute discrepancy compared to the commercial system is 0.13 mm (0.43 mm). These values are similar to results obtained with repeated deliveries of the same MTWL plan with the same phantom setup. Both validation tests yield reasonable results and are therefore considered successful. The MTWL test was performed independently by three physicists on two linacs to investigate repeatability, resulting in a mean (maximum) absolute discrepancy of 0.14 mm (0.51 mm) among the various attempts. Significance . Successful completion of this quality assurance test, using our customizable and open-source system, provides confidence that multi-target, single isocentre radiotherapy treatments can be delivered with sufficient geometric accuracy according to the chosen tolerance level.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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