MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115808570

Extremity TLD Monitoring at OPG: Calibration, Quality Assurance, and Type Testing

2005· dissertation· en· W7115808570 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermoluminescent dosimeterDosimetryQuality assuranceDosimeterChipMonte Carlo method
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At Ontario Power Generation (OPG), extremity doses are measured using Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD) chips. These chips are lithium fluoride crystals doped with magnesium and titanium (LiF:Mg,Ti). In order to accurately measure the dose received by a worker, it is essential to understand and quantify all potential influencing factors relating to the extremity dosimetry system. These factors include the way the system is calibrated, the response of the TLD chips to different types and energies of radiation, the effects of the different chip holders used for chip irradiations, and environmental factors. A special investigation was undertaken to identify and quantify the source of a long-standing bias in quality assurance (QA) test results between the Whitby Health Physics Laboratory (HPL) and the National Research Council - Canada (NRCC). The four major factors contributing to the bias were determined to be: 1) The response of LiF:Mg,Ti to the different irradiation sources used at the Whitby HPL (137Cs) and at the NRCC (60Co). 2) A difference in sensitivity between the field chips and the chips used to calibrate the readers at the Whitby HPL. 3) Differences in exposure rate standards used at the NRCC and at the Whitby HPL. 4) Different chip holders, used to hold the chips during an irradiation, at the NRCC and at the Whitby HPL. Experimental tests and Monte Carlo simulations have been performed to determine the relative response between various chip holders used at the Whitby HPL and at the NRCC. The experimental results were found to be in close agreement with the results generated by Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP). Monte Carlo simulations have also been used to determine the effects of adding different thicknesses of material in front, behind, and around a single TLD chip. The properties of a new bulk chip holder are also examined with the intention of replacing the current bulk chip holder. After making an individual sensitivity correction, it was determined that the response across the new holder was uniform. This implies that two chips placed anywhere in the holder will receive the same dose. The remaining part of the project focused on the identification and quantification of several factors which can influence TLD results. These tests included a measurement of the repeatability of the TLD process, the minimum time required between the annealing and the irradiation, and a 7-day fade test. For the first type test, sets of measurements were repeated under identical conditions to examine how repeatable a given measurement may be. The average relative standard deviation of the TLD readings from the chips was measured to be 1.7%. A second type test was conducted to identify the minimum amount of time required between the annealing period and the irradiation. This minimum time required for an accurate measurement was determined to be about 24 hours, but only about 6 hours are required for a relative measurement. A 7-day fade test was conducted to determine the amount of signal lost in the first week. Using the equation of the trend-line, a fade rate of 1.5% per week was calculated for the first week.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207