Development of a radiochromic film dosimetry readout system
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiochromic film is widely recognized for its high spatial resolution and ease of use in radiation dosimetry, but accurate and artifact-free readout remains a challenge. In this work, we evaluate and compare three different radiochromic film imaging systems: a conventional flatbed scanner, a diffuse light field and camera setup, and a custom-built scanning point source and detector system. We investigate each system's optical characteristics, imaging performance, and clinical utility, with a particular focus on small field dosimetry, where conventional systems often fall short. Our results highlight significant limitations in the diffuse light field system due to stray light contamination which leads to dose underestimation in small irradiated fields. The point source system demonstrated excellent accuracy and robustness across all field sizes with no measurable stray light or polarization effects. This work demonstrates that a purpose-built point source scanning system offers a reliable alternative to commercial flatbed scanners.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it