Uncertainty-driven determination of target measurement times for indirect tracking validation in adaptive radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. Hybrid indirect tumor tracking strategies combine continuous monitoring of surrogate signals with episodic radiographic imaging of the target to check and update their models during the treatment. This validation process is traditionally performed at predetermined and fixed-rate time intervals. This study investigates a new validation procedure based on the real-time uncertainty associated with the predicted target positions. Approach. An adaptive version of a Bayesian method for indirect tracking is developed to simulate different validation processes within a single framework: no validation, regular validation and uncertainty-based validation. While regular validation involves measuring targets at fixed intervals, uncertainty-based validation takes advantage of a key Bayesian feature, which is the real-time confidence information associated with predictions. The validation processes are applied to ground truth breathing signals consisting of a lung target and two different surrogates (one internal, one external). Their impact on prediction accuracy is evaluated with root-mean-square error (RMSE) and incidence of large errors. The number of validation measurements triggered is also examined. Main results. When using the internal surrogate and compared to regular validation, uncertainty-based validation results in significantly better prediction accuracy while using fewer validation measurements: RMSE and fraction of large errors are reduced on average by 12% and 26% respectively, with 36% fewer validation measurements. With the external surrogate, whose correlation with the target is less stable over time, more validation measurements are automatically triggered, which leads to a substantial reduction of prediction errors: RMSE and fraction of large errors are reduced on average by 17% and 28% respectively compared to regular validation. It is also observed that depending on the initial instant, regular validation can result in worse prediction accuracy compared to no validation. Significance. Uncertainty-based validation has the potential to be more efficient and effective than a validation process performed at prescheduled and fixed-rate time intervals.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".