MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6947893182 · doi:10.4224/40003125

Determination of the output of the linac-MR system, installed at the Cross Cancer Institute, using alanine dosimeters traceable to the Canadian primary standard of absorbed dose to water

2023· report· en· W6947893182 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2023
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMétis National Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimeterDosimetryAbsorbed doseIonization chamberCalibrationDose profileIrradiationPercentage depth dose curveBeam (structure)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Research Council of Canada has developed a capability for using alanine dosimeters to measure absorbed dose to water at therapy dose levels in Co-60 and MV photon beams. The stated uncertainty in the determination of dose using such dosimeters in a clinical radiation beam is estimated to be less than 1 % for doses in the range 10 Gy to 100 Gy. This NRC capability was applied to the linac-MR installed at the Cross Cancer Institute to provide external validation of the dose measured by medical physicists at the centre using standard dosimetry protocols and ionization chambers. Control dosimeters were used to investigate any impact of shipping, no significant effect was seen. The dose was determined from the alanine measurements using a calibration in a Co-60 zero-magnetic field combined with correction factors for the actual irradiation field being a ~ 7 MV x-ray beam in a 0.5 T magnetic field (1.005 and 0.998 respectively). The agreement between stated and measured doses was better than 1 %, less than the combined k=1 uncertainty of the alanine and ion chamber dose measurements.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→