MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394964142 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad40f7

The effect of electron backscatter and charge build up in media on beam current transformer signal for ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) electron beam monitoring

2024· article· en· W4394964142 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Pageot, Karim Zerouali, Dominique Guillet, Bryan Muir, James Renaud, Arthur Lalonde

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronCathode rayFlash (photography)Backscatter (email)TransformerSIGNAL (programming language)Beam (structure)Materials sciencePhysicsOptoelectronicsOpticsElectrical engineeringVoltageComputer scienceTelecommunicationsEngineeringNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. Beam current transformers (BCT) are promising detectors for real-time beam monitoring in ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) electron radiotherapy. However, previous studies have reported a significant sensitivity of the BCT signal to changes in source-to-surface distance (SSD), field size, and phantom material which have until now been attributed to the fluctuating levels of electrons backscattered within the BCT. The purpose of this study is to evaluate this hypothesis, with the goal of understanding and mitigating the variations in BCT signal due to changes in irradiation conditions. Approach. Monte Carlo simulations and experimental measurements were conducted with a UHDR-capable intra-operative electron linear accelerator to analyze the impact of backscattered electrons on BCT signal. The potential influence of charge accumulation in media as a mechanism affecting BCT signal perturbation was further investigated by examining the effects of phantom conductivity and electrical grounding. Finally, the effectiveness of Faraday shielding to mitigate BCT signal variations is evaluated. Main Results. Monte Carlo simulations indicated that the fraction of electrons backscattered in water and on the collimator plastic at 6 and 9 MeV is lower than 1%, suggesting that backscattered electrons alone cannot account for the observed BCT signal variations. However, our experimental measurements confirmed previous findings of BCT response variation up to 15% for different field diameters. A significant impact of phantom type on BCT response was also observed, with variations in BCT signal as high as 14.1% when comparing measurements in water and solid water. The introduction of a Faraday shield to our applicators effectively mitigated the dependencies of BCT signal on SSD, field size, and phantom material. Significance. Our results indicate that variations in BCT signal as a function of SSD, field size, and phantom material are likely driven by an electric field originating in dielectric materials exposed to the UHDR electron beam. Strategies such as Faraday shielding were shown to effectively prevent these electric fields from affecting BCT signal, enabling reliable BCT-based electron UHDR beam monitoring.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure AnalysisFrench-language works237,207