Review



range verification methods  (Knopf Inc)

 
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 90
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    Knopf Inc range verification methods
    Basics of range <t>verification,</t> exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.
    Range Verification Methods, supplied by Knopf Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/range verification methods/product/Knopf Inc
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    range verification methods - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Automation and uncertainty analysis of a method for in-vivo range verification in particle therapy"

    Article Title: Automation and uncertainty analysis of a method for in-vivo range verification in particle therapy

    Journal: Physics in medicine and biology

    doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/19/5903

    Basics of range verification, exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Basics of range verification, exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.

    Techniques Used: Activity Assay

    Range verification of the proton-irradiation induced activity in P7. (a) Exemplary sagittal planes of the simulation (top) and the offline PET measurement (bottom) are displayed. (b) The corresponding normalized activity depth profiles are shown together with the dose profile. The activity fall-off thresholds of 25 % and 50 % are marked by blue lines. (c) The MLS results (top) show only small deviations in most parts of the distribution compared to the MP (bottom) calculations.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Range verification of the proton-irradiation induced activity in P7. (a) Exemplary sagittal planes of the simulation (top) and the offline PET measurement (bottom) are displayed. (b) The corresponding normalized activity depth profiles are shown together with the dose profile. The activity fall-off thresholds of 25 % and 50 % are marked by blue lines. (c) The MLS results (top) show only small deviations in most parts of the distribution compared to the MP (bottom) calculations.

    Techniques Used: Irradiation, Activity Assay

    Range verification with several offline measured activity distributions after different treatment fractions of P6. The most-likely shift for the analysis between M1 and M2 (a), M1 and M3 (b) as well as between M1 and M4 (c) is shown.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Range verification with several offline measured activity distributions after different treatment fractions of P6. The most-likely shift for the analysis between M1 and M2 (a), M1 and M3 (b) as well as between M1 and M4 (c) is shown.

    Techniques Used: Activity Assay



    Similar Products

    range verification methods  (Knopf Inc)
    90
    Knopf Inc range verification methods
    Basics of range <t>verification,</t> exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.
    Range Verification Methods, supplied by Knopf Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/range verification methods/product/Knopf Inc
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    range verification methods - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    reliable and precise method for patient-specific range verification  (Knopf Inc)
    90
    Knopf Inc reliable and precise method for patient-specific range verification
    Basics of range <t>verification,</t> exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.
    Reliable And Precise Method For Patient Specific Range Verification, supplied by Knopf Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/reliable and precise method for patient-specific range verification/product/Knopf Inc
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    reliable and precise method for patient-specific range verification - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Basics of range verification, exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.

    Journal: Physics in medicine and biology

    Article Title: Automation and uncertainty analysis of a method for in-vivo range verification in particle therapy

    doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/19/5903

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Basics of range verification, exemplarily shown for the voxel coordinates (x, y) = (70,59) in patient P3 (cf table 1). Left: β+-activity profiles obtained by MC simulation and in-beam PET measurement, normalized to the maximum, as well as the corresponding dose profile are shown. The blue lines denote the location of the activity maximum, the 50 % dose fall-off (vertically, left to right) and the 20 % activity limit (horizontally). Right: The profile difference Ddiff is visualized as function of the profile shift for different analysis starting depths zmin.

    Article Snippet: In the following section, the basic principles of the range verification methods by ( Knopf et al. 2008 ) and ( Min et al. 2013 ) are reviewed, which are used in the development of the MLS approach and applied to the investigated data, respectively.

    Techniques: Activity Assay

    Range verification of the proton-irradiation induced activity in P7. (a) Exemplary sagittal planes of the simulation (top) and the offline PET measurement (bottom) are displayed. (b) The corresponding normalized activity depth profiles are shown together with the dose profile. The activity fall-off thresholds of 25 % and 50 % are marked by blue lines. (c) The MLS results (top) show only small deviations in most parts of the distribution compared to the MP (bottom) calculations.

    Journal: Physics in medicine and biology

    Article Title: Automation and uncertainty analysis of a method for in-vivo range verification in particle therapy

    doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/19/5903

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Range verification of the proton-irradiation induced activity in P7. (a) Exemplary sagittal planes of the simulation (top) and the offline PET measurement (bottom) are displayed. (b) The corresponding normalized activity depth profiles are shown together with the dose profile. The activity fall-off thresholds of 25 % and 50 % are marked by blue lines. (c) The MLS results (top) show only small deviations in most parts of the distribution compared to the MP (bottom) calculations.

    Article Snippet: In the following section, the basic principles of the range verification methods by ( Knopf et al. 2008 ) and ( Min et al. 2013 ) are reviewed, which are used in the development of the MLS approach and applied to the investigated data, respectively.

    Techniques: Irradiation, Activity Assay

    Range verification with several offline measured activity distributions after different treatment fractions of P6. The most-likely shift for the analysis between M1 and M2 (a), M1 and M3 (b) as well as between M1 and M4 (c) is shown.

    Journal: Physics in medicine and biology

    Article Title: Automation and uncertainty analysis of a method for in-vivo range verification in particle therapy

    doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/19/5903

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Range verification with several offline measured activity distributions after different treatment fractions of P6. The most-likely shift for the analysis between M1 and M2 (a), M1 and M3 (b) as well as between M1 and M4 (c) is shown.

    Article Snippet: In the following section, the basic principles of the range verification methods by ( Knopf et al. 2008 ) and ( Min et al. 2013 ) are reviewed, which are used in the development of the MLS approach and applied to the investigated data, respectively.

    Techniques: Activity Assay