MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7049133467

Monte Carlo Validation of Dose, Quality Assurance Protocols and Shielding in Radiation Therapy

2024· other· en· W7049133467 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaBrock University
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodQuality assuranceElectromagnetic shieldingDosimetryBeam (structure)Linear particle acceleratorRadiation protectionRadiation therapyNeutronShielded cable
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work is a two-fold Monte Carlo study of radiation transport through medical linear accelerator treatment heads and the shielded rooms that house them. Firstly, a Monte Carlo model of the Elekta Agility treatment head in use at the Walker Family Cancer Center was created and validated using experimental data for three different treatment energies (6 MV, 10 MV and 18 MV). This model was used for an in-depth study of incident beam deviations and their impact on dose collected at patient level. Standard quality assurance tests of beam flatness, profile constancy, and TPR20/10 were used to characterize how these deviations presented themselves in the treatment beam. Deviations in the beam energy, position, and direction showed, for the first time, a direct link of the sensitivity of current quality assurance tests to beam parameters. A novel quality assurance metric, known as the Wasserstein distance, was implemented to determine if the two deviations were distinguishable at patient level. The second study focused on neutron transport throughout the patient treatment room and surrounding areas. While the treatment beam used at the Walker Family Cancer Center is a photon beam, photo-neutrons are an unwanted secondary particle created in the treatment head and must be shielded for in accordance with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The Walker Family Cancer Center uses a new style of doorless bunker, the design of which was commissioned on theoretical predictions - based solely on empirical data - alone. We use our validated Monte Carlo study of the treatment head to simulate the photo-neutron production at the highest treatment energy. This information was then used in a secondary Monte Carlo simulation of the treatment room to predict the yearly dose at key radiation survey points around the room. On top of these specific points, the dose was also determined for various other locations inside of the treatment room, allowing for a more in-depth study of the theoretical equations that govern radiation transport through the room.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→