-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
radiation beams #72
Comments
I wasn't part of that discussion, but I do think the definition could use
some work. I would expect a radiation therapy beam to be the actual
radiation released, as a result of a particular configuration of a machine,
which would be captured in a specification or plan about the therapy. To
say that the beam *is* a configuration seems confusing.
…On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:06 PM Mark PHillips ***@***.***> wrote:
I was looking at a class that we (I) defined: radiation_therapy_beam.
In the comments section I find the following.
-------------------------------------------------
_definition "A configuration of the elements that comprise a radiation
therapy device whose function is to deliver a planned amount of radiation
to a particular patient."
rdfs:comment "Meeting of 9/2/20: General discussion led to conclusion that
this is a bad class. Should probably be deleted.
Some examples of radiation therapy beam:
- a 6 MV x-ray beam modulated by a 30 degree wedge with the gantry angle
of 90 degrees, collimator rotation of 0 degrees, and planned dose to the
isocenter of 100 cGy.
- a 10 MV x-ray beam collimated using a mulitleaf collimator in a set of
steps (segments) of a given shape and monitor units with a gantry angle of
15 degrees, collimator angle of 20 degrees on a given linear accelerator.
[MHP 9/1/20]"_
-----------------------------------------------
Does anyone remember why we thought this is a bad class?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#72>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAATBN73GXYILML3SGUWXADV7X5RVANCNFSM6AAAAAAQUHPGLY>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
There is also a "radiation_beam" which is just the collimated stream of particles (x-rays, electrons,etc) that deliver the energy. This is "part_of" the radiation_therapy_beam. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I was looking at a class that we (I) defined: radiation_therapy_beam.
In the comments section I find the following.
-------------------------------------------------
_definition "A configuration of the elements that comprise a radiation therapy device whose function is to deliver a planned amount of radiation to a particular patient."
rdfs:comment "Meeting of 9/2/20: General discussion led to conclusion that this is a bad class. Should probably be deleted.
Some examples of radiation therapy beam:
- a 6 MV x-ray beam modulated by a 30 degree wedge with the gantry angle of 90 degrees, collimator rotation of 0 degrees, and planned dose to the isocenter of 100 cGy.
- a 10 MV x-ray beam collimated using a mulitleaf collimator in a set of steps (segments) of a given shape and monitor units with a gantry angle of 15 degrees, collimator angle of 20 degrees on a given linear accelerator.
[MHP 9/1/20]"_
-----------------------------------------------
Does anyone remember why we thought this is a bad class?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: