• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.108-115
• /
• 2022

Background: This study was aimed at comparing and analyzing the results of FractionLab (Varian/Mobius Medical System) with those of portal dosimetry that uses an electronic portal imaging device. Portal dosimetry is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Methods: The study includes 29 patients who underwent IMRT on a Novalis-Tx linear accelerator (Varian Medical System and Brain-LAB) between June 2019 and March 2021. We analyzed the multileaf collimator DynaLog files generated after portal dosimetry to evaluate the same condition using FractionLab. The results of the recently launched FractionLab at various gamma indices (0.1%/0.1 mm-1%/1 mm) are analyzed and compared with those of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm). Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and FractionLab are 98.1% (95.5%-100%) and 97.5% (92.3%-99.7%) at 0.6%/0.6 mm, respectively. The results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) are statistically comparable with the QA results of FractionLab (0.6%/0.6 mm-0.9%/0.9 mm). Conclusion: This paper presents the clinical performance of FractionLab by the comparison of the QA results of FractionLab using portal dosimetry with various gamma indexes when performing patient-specific QA in IMRT treatment. Further, the appropriate gamma index when performing patient-specific QA with FractionLab is provided.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.33-41
• /
• 2012

For applying the quality assurance (QA) of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) introduced in Eulji Hospital, we classify it into three different QA steps, treatment planning QA, pretreatment delivering QA, and treatment verifying QA. These steps are based on the existing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA that is currently used in our hospital. In each QA step, the evaluated items that are from QA program are configured and documented. In this study, QA program is not only applied to actual patient treatment, but also evaluated to establish a reference of clinical acceptance in pretreatment delivering QA. As a result, the confidence limits (CLs) in the measurements for the high-dose and low-dose regions are similar to the conventional IMRT level, and the clinical acceptance references in our hospital are determined to be 3 to 5% for the high-dose and the low-dose regions, respectively. Due to the characteristics of VMAT, evaluation of the intensity map was carried out using an ArcCheck device that was able to measure the intensity map in all directions, $360^{\circ}$. With a couple of dosimetric devices, the gamma index was evaluated and analyzed. The results were similar to the result of individual intensity maps in IMRT. Mapcheck, which is a 2-dimensional (2D) array device, was used to display the isodose distributions and gave very excellent local CL results. Thus, in our hospital, the acceptance references used in practical clinical application for the intensity maps of $360^{\circ}$ directions and the coronal isodose distributions were determined to be 93% and 95%, respectively. To reduce arbitrary uncertainties and system errors, we had to evaluate the local CLs by using a phantom and to cooperate with multiple organizations to participate in this evaluation. In addition, we had to evaluate the local CLs by dividing them into different sections about the patient treatment points in practical clinics.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.128-138
• /
• 2019

Purpose: Segmental analysis of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is not clinically used for compositional error source evaluation. Instead, dose verification is routinely used for plan-specific quality assurance (QA). While this approach identifies the resultant error, it does not specify which machine parameter was responsible for the error. In this research study, we adopted an approach for the segmental analysis of VMAT as a part of machine QA of linear accelerator (LINAC). Methods: Two portal dose QA plans were generated for VMAT QA: a) for full arc and b) for the arc, which was segmented in 12 subsegments. We investigated the multileaf collimator (MLC) position and dosimetric accuracy in the full and segmented arc delivery schemes. A MATLAB program was used to calculate the MLC position error from the data in the dynalog file. The Gamma passing rate (GPR) and the measured to planned dose difference (DD) in each pixel of the electronic portal imaging device was the measurement for dosimetric accuracy. The eclipse treatment planning system and a MATLAB program were used to calculate the dosimetric accuracy. Results: The maximum root-mean-square error of the MLC positions were <1 mm. The GPR was within the range of 98%-99.7% and was similar in both types of VMAT delivery. In general, the DD was <5 calibration units in both full arcs. A similar DD distribution was found for continuous arc and segmented arcs sums. Exceedingly high DD were not observed in any of the arc segment delivery schemes. The LINAC performance was acceptable regarding the execution of the VMAT QA plan. Conclusions: The segmental analysis proposed in this study is expected to be useful for the prediction of the delivery of the VMAT in relation to the gantry angle. We thus recommend the use of segmental analysis of VMAT as part of the regular QA.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.37 no.1
• /
• pp.60-65
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The quality assurance (QA) chart rounds are multidisciplinary meetings to review radiation therapy (RT) treatment plans. This study focus on describing the changes in RT management based on QA round reviews in a single institution. Materials and Methods: After 9 full years of implementation, a retrospective review of all patients whose charts passed through departmental QA chart rounds from 2007 to 2015. The reviewed cases were presented for RT plan review; subcategorized based on decision in QA rounds into: approved, minor modifications or major modifications. Major modification defined as any substantial change which required patient re-simulation or re-planning prior to commencement of RT. Minor modification included treatment plan changes which didn't necessarily require RT re-planning. Results: Overall 7,149 RT treatment plans for different anatomical sites were reviewed at QA rounds. From these treatment plans, 6,654 (93%) were approved, 144 (2%) required minor modifications, while 351 (5%) required major modifications. Major modification included changes in: selected RT dose (96/351, 27%), target volume definition (127/351, 36%), organs-at-risk contouring (10/351, 3%), dose volume objectives/constraints criteria (90/351, 26%), and intent of treatment (28/351, 8%). The RT plans which required major modification according to the tumor subtype were as follows: head and neck (104/904, 12%), thoracic (12/199, 6%), gastrointestinal (33/687,5%), skin (5/106, 5%), genitourinary (16/359, 4%), breast (104/2387, 4%), central nervous system (36/846, 4%), sarcoma (11/277, 4%), pediatric (7/251, 3%), lymphoma (10/423, 2%), gynecological tumors (2/359, 1%), and others (11/351, 3%). Conclusion: Multi-disciplinary standardized QA chart rounds provide a comprehensive and an influential method on RT plans and/or treatment decisions.

• Proceedings of the Safety Management and Science Conference
• /
• 2010.04a
• /
• pp.231-237
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to investigate the actual conditions of radiation safety supervision in animal clinics using quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) of diagnostic X-ray units. The surveys for QA/QC, equipment condition, and safety supervision were carried out in 18 animal clinics randomly. The QA/QC included reproducibility of dose exposure, kVp, mAs, collimator accuracy test, collimator luminance test, X-ray view box luminance test, grounding system equipment test and external leakage current test. As a result, 44.44% of reproducibility of dose exposure was proper, 81. 25% of kVp test was good, and 100% of mAs test was appropriate. Also, 66.66% of collimator accuracy test was proper, 61.11% of collimator luminance test was good, 53.13% of X-ray view box luminance test was suitable. In addition, only 5.55% of grounding system equipment and ground resistance was proper, 63.64% of external leakage current test was appropriate in grounding system equipment test.

• Annual Conference on Human and Language Technology
• /
• 2015.10a
• /
• pp.139-141
• /
• 2015

본 논문은 커뮤니티 기반의 질의-응답 서비스에서 사용자 질의의 주제를 분류하는 시스템을 소개한다. 커뮤니티 기반의 질의-응답 서비스는 분야에 따라 다양한 주제를 가질 수 있으며 오늘 날 사용자 질의의 주제 분류에는 통계 기반의 분류 방법이 많이 이용되고 있다. 통계 기반의 분류 방법으로 사용자 질의를 분류하기 위해서는 주제에 적합한 대량의 학습 말뭉치가 필요하다. 주제에 적합한 대량의 학습 말뭉치를 사람이 직접 구축하는 것은 많은 시간과 비용이 든다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 이러한 문제를 해결하기 위해 위키피디아 문서를 Supervised K-means Clustering 기법으로 주제별로 분류함으로써 학습 말뭉치를 반자동으로 구축하는 방법을 제안한다. 그 다음, 생성된 학습 말뭉치로 지지 벡터 기계를 학습하여 사용자 질의의 주제를 분류하게 된다. 위키피디아 문서와 사용자 질의는 다른 도메인의 문서임에도 불구하고 본 논문의 시스템으로 사용자 질의의 주제를 분류한 결과 77.33%의 정확도를 보였다.

• Proceedings of the Korea Information Processing Society Conference
• /
• 2023.11a
• /
• pp.487-488
• /
• 2023

본 논문에서는 RLHF 기반의 오픈소스 LLM인 llama-2-13b model을 FinQA task에 적용하여 그 성능을 확인해 보았다. 이때, CoT, few-shot과 같은 다양한 prompting 기법들을 적용해보며 어떤 방법이 가장 효과적인지 비교했다. 그 결과, 한 번(total)에 task를 수행한 경우 few-shot 예시를 2개 사용했을 때보다 3개 사용했을 때, subtask로 나누어 수행한 경우 prompt로 답(simple)만 제시했을 때보다 CoT 형식으로 주었을 때, 각각 24.85%의 정확도로 가장 높은 성능을 보였다.

• Journal of Aerospace System Engineering
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.6-11
• /
• 2009

It is anticipated that quality assurance for the Ka band Communication Payload System(COPS) development program of the communication, Ocean & Meteorological Satellite(COMS) may be a core technical factor to be concerned in order to avoid any failure, and to assure its final performance during the mission lifetime in space. Those can be managed and verified and assessed by performing the Quality Assurance (QA) and risk management which helps to prevent and to reduce the critical fails. This paper introduces the Product Assurance (PA) system and procedures for controlling and monitoring sub-contractors which were participated in Ka band Communication Payload System (COPS) development. Also this paper shows Quality Assurance (QA) procedures and detailed their processes for assured the product performed by local companies from site survey for selecting companies to delivery of their equipment.

• Journal of Aerospace System Engineering
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.22-27
• /
• 2008

It is anticipated that quality assurance for the Ka band Communication Payload System(COPS) development program of the Communication, Ocean & Meteorological Satellite(COMS) may be a core technical factor to be concerned in order to avoid any failure, and to assure its performance during the mission lifetime in space. Those can be managed and verified and assessed by performing the Quality Assurance (QA) and risk management which helps to prevent and reduce the critical fails. This paper introduces the Product Assurance (PA) system and procedures for Ka band Communication Payload System which was established and performed during the Qualification Model (QM) manufacturing phase. In this paper, we present detailed process for the products manufactured by local companies according to PA procedures operated through whole phases from design to test of equipment. Also this paper shows Quality Assurance (QA) procedures and detailed their processes for assured the product quality manufactured by local companies.

• Proceedings of the KSR Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.30-35
• /
• 2001

THSRC uses the self-certification system for its high-speed rail construction. The self-certification system takes advantages of obtaining good qualify in project and communicating well between contractors and QA/QC organization. But one should understand ISO 9000s and the self-certification system of contractors in advance and contractors try to control Quality of construction spontaneously. Actually, construction progress is slowed down because of increased QA/QC works. For adapting this system in domestic construction, it is need to understand ISO 9000s and the self-certification system.