Spectral characterization and comparison of EBT3, EBT4, and EBT-XD radiochromic films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzed the spectral response of EBT3, EBT4, and EBT-XD radiochromic films using absorption spectroscopy. The primary focus was on characterizing the evolution of spectral signatures across a range of absorbed doses, thereby elucidating the unique dose-dependent response profiles of each film type. Ten samples of each film type were subjected to open field irradiation within their designated dose ranges (1-20 Gy for EBT3 and EBT4, 1-50 Gy for EBT-XD). The corresponding absorption spectra were recorded and studied via decomposition and parameterization of dose-dependent spectral features. Lorentzian profiles were employed for spectral decomposition. Each film type displayed unique spectral signatures with distinct absorption peaks: nine for EBT3, eleven for EBT4, and twelve constituent profiles for EBT-XD. Notably, the EBT4 film demonstrated a slight difference in the blue part of the absorption spectrum and a change in the response, relative to its EBT3 predecessor. Orientation dependence of the film spectra was most pronounced for the EBT3 film type, followed by a declining trend across EBT4 and EBT-XD films. Absorption spectroscopy portrayed distinct spectral fingerprints of the studied film types, aiding the selection of the most suitable film for specific applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".