Visit https://ebookfinal.

com to download the full version and

explore more ebook

Radiation and Particle Detectors Volume 175

Proceedings of the International School of Physics
Enrico Fermi 1st Edition S. Bertolucci

_____ Click the link below to download _____

https://ebookfinal.com/download/radiation-and-particle-
detectors-volume-175-proceedings-of-the-international-
school-of-physics-enrico-fermi-1st-edition-s-
bertolucci/

Explore and download more ebook at ebookfinal.com

Here are some recommended products that might interest you.
You can download now and explore!

Particle physics phenomenology proceedings of the fifth

International Workshop Chi Pen Taitung Taiwain sic 8 11
November 2000 5th ed Edition Hsiang-Nan Li
https://ebookfinal.com/download/particle-physics-phenomenology-
proceedings-of-the-fifth-international-workshop-chi-pen-taitung-
taiwain-sic-8-11-november-2000-5th-ed-edition-hsiang-nan-li/
ebookfinal.com

The Ideas Of Particle Physics 3rd Edition G.D.Coughlan

J.E.Dodd B.M.Gripaios

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-ideas-of-particle-physics-3rd-
edition-g-d-coughlan-j-e-dodd-b-m-gripaios/

ebookfinal.com

Origin and History of the Earth Proceedings of the 30th

International Geological Congress Volume 1 First Edition
Jahn
https://ebookfinal.com/download/origin-and-history-of-the-earth-
proceedings-of-the-30th-international-geological-congress-
volume-1-first-edition-jahn/
ebookfinal.com

Physics Chemistry and Applications of Nonostructures

Reviews and Short Notes Proceedings of the International
Conference Nanomeeting 2011 1st Edition Victor E.
Borisenko
https://ebookfinal.com/download/physics-chemistry-and-applications-of-
nonostructures-reviews-and-short-notes-proceedings-of-the-
international-conference-nanomeeting-2011-1st-edition-victor-e-
borisenko/
ebookfinal.com
Reconciliation of Geometry and Perception in Radiation
Physics 1st Edition Benoit Beckers

https://ebookfinal.com/download/reconciliation-of-geometry-and-
perception-in-radiation-physics-1st-edition-benoit-beckers/

ebookfinal.com

At the Frontier of Particle Physics Handbook of QCD Vol 4

1st Edition M. Shifman

https://ebookfinal.com/download/at-the-frontier-of-particle-physics-
handbook-of-qcd-vol-4-1st-edition-m-shifman/

ebookfinal.com

Walter and Miller s Textbook of Radiotherapy Radiation

Physics Therapy and Oncology 7th Edition R Paul Symonds

https://ebookfinal.com/download/walter-and-miller-s-textbook-of-
radiotherapy-radiation-physics-therapy-and-oncology-7th-edition-r-
paul-symonds/
ebookfinal.com

Particle Physics 3rd Edition Brian Martin

https://ebookfinal.com/download/particle-physics-3rd-edition-brian-
martin/

ebookfinal.com

Radiation Physics of Metals and Its Applications 2nd

Edition Lev Ivanovich Ivanov

https://ebookfinal.com/download/radiation-physics-of-metals-and-its-
applications-2nd-edition-lev-ivanovich-ivanov/

ebookfinal.com
Radiation and Particle Detectors Volume 175 Proceedings
of the International School of Physics Enrico Fermi 1st
Edition S. Bertolucci Digital Instant Download
Author(s): S. Bertolucci, U. Bottigli, P. Oliva
ISBN(s): 9788874380589, 8874380585
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 6.64 MB
Year: 2010
Language: english
 ` ITALIANA DI FISICA
SOCIETA

RENDICONTI
DELLA

SCUOLA INTERNAZIONALE DI FISICA

“ENRICO FERMI”

CLXXV Corso
a cura di S. Bertolucci e U. Bottigli
Direttori del Corso
e di
P. Oliva
VARENNA SUL LAGO DI COMO
VILLA MONASTERO

20 – 25 Luglio 2009

Rivelatori per radiazione

e particelle
2010

` ITALIANA DI FISICA
SOCIETA
BOLOGNA-ITALY
 ITALIAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY

PROCEEDINGS
OF THE

INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF PHYSICS

“ENRICO FERMI”

Course CLXXV
edited by S. Bertolucci and U. Bottigli
Directors of the Course
and
P. Oliva
VARENNA ON LAKE COMO
VILLA MONASTERO

20 – 25 July 2009

Radiation and Particle

Detectors

2010

AMSTERDAM, OXFORD, TOKIO, WASHINGTON DC

 Copyright 
c 2010 by Società Italiana di Fisica

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

ISSN 0074-784X (print)

ISSN 1879-8195 (online)
ISBN 978-1-60750-630-0 (print) (IOS)
ISBN 978-1-60750-631-7 (online) (IOS)
ISBN 978-88-7438-058-9 (SIF)
LCCN 2010934193

Production Manager Copy Editor

A. Oleandri M. Missiroli

jointly published and distributed by:

IOS PRESS SOCIETÀ ITALIANA DI FISICA

Nieuwe Hemweg 6B Via Saragozza 12
1013 BG Amsterdam 40123 Bologna
The Netherlands Italy
fax: +31 20 620 34 19 fax: +39 051 581340
[email protected] [email protected]

Distributor in the UK and Ireland

Distributor in the USA and Canada
Gazelle Books Services Ltd.
IOS Press, Inc.
White Cross Mills
4502 Rachael Manor Drive
Hightown
Fairfax, VA 22032
Lancaster LA1 4XS
USA
United Kingdom
fax: +1 703 323 3668
fax: +44 1524 63232
[email protected]
[email protected]

Proprietà Letteraria Riservata

Printed in Italy
Supported by

Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN)

INFN, Sezione di Pisa

This page intentionally left blank
INDICE

S. Bertolucci, U. Bottigli and P. Oliva – Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pag. XI

Gruppo fotografico dei partecipanti al Corso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XVI

P. Oliva – Detectors for medical physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIX

G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, P. Lojacono, V. Mon-

gelli, S. Pittera, L. M. Valastro, S. Lo Nigro, L. Raffaele, V.
Salamone, M. G. Sabini, R. Cirio and F. Marchetto – Detectors for
hadrontherapy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Irradiation configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
.
2 1. Absolute dose determination: beam calibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
.
2 2. Depth dose distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
.
2 3. Lateral dose distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Detectors for relative dosimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
.
3 1. Depth dose reference detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
.
3 2. Reference detectors for transversal dose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Relative detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
.
4 1. Natural and CVD diamond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
.
4 2. Termoluminescence detectors (TLD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
.
4 3. MOSFET dosimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
.
4 4. MOPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

P. A. Mandò – Detection setups in applications of accelerator-based tech-

niques to the analysis of Cultural Heritage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Introduction: Why Science for Cultural Heritage? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Ion Beam Analysis (IBA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Quantitative PIXE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
PIXE external beam setups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
External scanning microbeams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Measurement of beam current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

VII
VIII indice

G. Gaudio, M. Livan and R. Wigmans – The art of calorimetry . . . . . . . pag. 31

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2. The physics of shower development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
.
2 1. Electromagnetic showers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
.
2 2. Hadronic showers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
.
2 3. Lessons for calorimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3. The calorimeter response function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
.
3 1. Absolute response and response ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
.
3 2. Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
.
3 3. Fluctuations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
.
3 4. The shape of the response function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
.
3 5. Lessons for calorimeter design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4. The future of calorimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
.
4 1. The energy flow method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
.
4 2. Off-line compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
.
4 3. Dual-readout calorimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5. The DREAM project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
.
5 1. Measurement of the neutron fraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
.
5 2. Dual-readout with crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
.
5 2.1. Lead tungstate crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
.
5 2.2. Doped PbWO4 crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
.
5 2.3. BGO crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
.
5 3. Combined calorimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
6. Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

M. Mulders – The CMS detector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2. The CMS detector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3. Precise mapping of the central CMS magnetic field using probes . . . . . . . . 84
4. Precise mapping of the CMS magnetic field in the yoke using cosmic muons 86
5. Other commissioning results with cosmic muons from CRAFT . . . . . . . . . . 93
6. First CMS physics measurement with cosmic muons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
7. Observation of the first beam-induced muons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
8. Prospects for first physics with collisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
9. Summary and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

J. Marque for the Virgo Collaboration – A gravitational wave detector:

The Virgo interferometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
1. Gravitational waves (GWs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
.
1 1. First evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
.
1 2. Sources of gravitational waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
.
1 3. Compact binaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
.
1 4. Supernovae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
.
1 5. Pulsar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
.
1 6. Stochastic background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
.
1 7. Using gravitational waves to study the universe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
indice IX

2. The Virgo experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pag. 108

.
2 1. The Virgo project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
.
2 2. Gravitational-waves strength and polarization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
.
2 3. The Michelson interferometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
.
2 4. Sensitivity requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
.
2 5. Ground vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
.
2 6. Superattenuator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
.
2 7. The laser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
.
2 8. The amplifier and Pre-Mode Cleaner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
.
2 9. Electro-optic modulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
.
2 10. Beam geometry fluctuations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
.
2 11. Input Mode Cleaner cavity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
.
2 12. Frequency noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
.
2 13. The Faraday isolator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
.
2 14. Residual gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 15. The mirrors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 16. The coatings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 17. Thermal noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 18. Thermal lensing compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 19. Shot noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
.
2 20. Optical scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
.
2 21. Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
3. Other gravitational waves detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
.
3 1. Resonant-mass detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
.
3 2. The LIGO detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
.
3 3. The GEO detector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
.
3 4. Space interferometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
.
3 5. Pulsar timing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
4. Performances of gravitational waves detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
.
4 1. Resonant-mass detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
.
4 2. Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
.
4 3. Duty cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
5. Future challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
.
5 1. Future of ground-based interferometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
.
5 2. Advanced Virgo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
.
5 3. Some limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
.
5 4. Future beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
.
5 5. Quantum noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
.
5 6. Gravity gradient noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
.
5 7. Einstein Telescope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

G. Riccobene and P. Sapienza – Underwater/ice high-energy neutrino

telescopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
1. The Cosmic-Ray spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
2. The high-energy gamma-neutrino connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
3. High-energy neutrino detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
4. Underwater/ice Čerenkov technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
X indice
.
4 1. Sources of background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pag. 138
5. Status of neutrino telescope projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
.
5 1. Baikal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
.
5 2. AMANDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
.
5 3. IceCube . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
.
5 4. NESTOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
.
5 5. ANTARES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
.
5 6. NEMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
.
5 7. KM3NeT: towards a km3 scale detector in the Mediterranean Sea . . 153
6. Ultra High Energy neutrino detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
.
6 1. The thermo-acoustic technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
7. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

Elenco dei partecipanti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Preface

From the 20th to 25th of July 2009 the International School of Physics entitled
“Radiation and Particle Detectors” was held in Varenna, which involved the use of detec-
tors for the research in fundamental physics, astro-particle physics, and applied physics.
At the school ten teachers and thirty students were present.
In the context of fundamental physics the High Energy Physics (HEP) plays an im-
portant role. In general the HEP experiments make use of sophisticated and massive
arrays of detectors to analyze the particles which are produced in high-energy scattering
events. This aim can be achieved in a large variety of approaches. Some examples are
the following:

– Measuring the position and length of ionization trails. Much of the detection
depends upon ionization.

– Measuring time of flight permits velocity measurements.

– Measuring radius of curvature after bending the paths of charged particles with
magnetic fields permits measurement of momentum.

– Detecting Cherenkov radiation gives some information about energy, mass.

– Measuring the coherent “transition radiation” for particles moving into a different
medium.

– Measuring synchrotron radiation for the lighter charged particles when their paths
are bent.

– Detecting neutrinos by steps in the decay schemes which are “not there”, i.e., using
conservation of momentum, etc. to imply the presence of undetected neutrinos.

– Measuring the electromagnetic showers produced by electrons and photons by

calorimetric methods.

XI
XII Preface

– Measuring nuclear cascades produced by hadrons in massive steel detectors which

use calorimetry to characterize the particles.
– Detecting muons by the fact that they penetrate all the calorimetric detectors.

All these types of detectors are used in the largest accelerator ever built: the Large
Hadron Collider (LHC). LHC is a proton-proton (also ions) ring, 27 km long, 100 m under-
ground, with 1232 superconducting dipoles 15 m long at 1.9 K producing a magnetic field
of 8.33 T. The figures of merit, for proton-proton operations, are beam-energy 7 TeV
(7 × TEVATRON), luminosity 1034 cm−2 s−1 (> 100 × TEVATRON), bunch spacing
24.95 ns, particles/bunch 1.1 · 1011 , and stored emergy/beam 350 MJ. For ion-ion opera-
tions we will have energy/nucleon 2.76 TeV/u, and total initial luminosity of 1027 cm−2 s−1 .
The main four experiments are two general purpose experiments (ATLAS and CMS), B-
physics and CP violation experiment (LHCB), and heavy ions experiment (ALICE).
The international community of physicists hopes that the LHC will help answer many
of the most fundamental questions in physics: questions concerning the basic laws gov-
erning the interactions and forces among the elementary particles, the deep structure of
space and time, especially regarding the intersection of quantum mechanics and cosmol-
ogy, where current theories and knowledge are unclear or break down altogether. The
enormous success of the Standard Model (SM), tested at per mil level with all particles
discovered except the Higgs boson, will hopefully be able to build a Cosmology Standard
Model.
The issues of LHC physics include, at least:

– Is the Higgs mechanism for generating elementary particles masses via electroweak
symmetry breaking indeed realised in nature? It is anticipated that the collider will
either demonstrate or rule out the existence of the elusive Higgs boson, completing
(or refuting) the SM.
– Is supersymmetry, an extension of the SM and Poincaré symmetry, realised in
nature, implying that all known particles have supersimmetric partners?
– Are there extra-dimensions, as predicted by various models inspired by string the-
ory, and can we detect them?
– What is the nature of the Dark Matter which appears to account for 23% of the
mass of the universe?

Other questions are:

– Are electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak interaction just different
manifestations of a single unified force, as predicted by various Grand Unification
Theories (GUTs)?
– Why is gravity so many orders of magnitude weaker than the other three funda-
mental interctions (Hierarchy Problem)? For all proposed solutions: new particles
should appear at TeV scale or below.
Preface XIII

– Are there additional sources of quark flavours, beyond those already predicted
within the Standard Model?

– Why are there apparent violations of the symmetry between matter and antimatter
(CP violation)?

– What was the nature of the quark-gluon plasma in the early universe (ALICE
experiment)?

Obviously, for the construction of a Standard Cosmology Model, the astro-particle ex-
periments are crucial with direct or indirect dark matter measurements. In particular, the
Payload for Antimatter Matter Exploration and Light-nuclei Astrophysics (PAMELA)
experiment, which went into space on a Russian satellite launched from the Baikonur
cosmodrome in June 2006, uses a spectrometer —based on a permanent magnet cou-
pled to a calorimeter— to determine the energy spectra of cosmic electrons, positrons,
antiprotons and light nuclei. The experiment is a collaboration between several Italian
institutes with additional participation from Germany, Russia and Sweden. PAMELA
represents a state of the art of the investigation of the cosmic radiation, addressing the
most compelling issues facing astrophysics and cosmology: the nature of the dark matter
that pervades the universe, the apparent absence of cosmological antimatter, the origin
and evolution of matter in the Galaxy. PAMELA, a powerful particle identifier using a
permanent magnet spectrometer with a variety of specialized detectors, is an instrument
of extraordinary scientific potential that is measuring with unprecedented precision and
sensitivity the abundance and energy spectra of cosmic rays electrons, positrons, an-
tiprotons and light nuclei over a very large range of energy from 50 MeV to hundreds
GeV, depending on the species. These measurements, together with the complementary
electromagnetic radiation observation that will be carried out by AGILE and GLAST
space missions, will help to unravel the mysteries of the most energetic processes known
in the universe. Recently published results from the PAMELA experiment have shown
conclusive evidence of a cosmic-positron abundance in the 1.5–100 GeV range. This
high-energy excess, which they identify with statistics that are better than previous ob-
servations, could arise from nearby pulsars or dark matter annihilation. Such a signal
is generally expected from dark matter annihilations. However, the hard positron spec-
trum and large amplitude are difficult to achieve in most conventional WIMP models.
The absence of any associated excess in antiprotons is highly constraining on any model
with hadronic annihilation modes. The light boson naturally provides a mechanism by
which large cross-sections can be achieved through the Sommerfeld enhancement, as was
recently proposed. Depending on the mass of the WIMP, the rise may continue above
300 GeV, the extent of PAMELA’s ability to discriminate electrons and positrons. The
data presented include more than a thousand million triggers collected between July
2006 and February 2008. Fine tuning of the particle identification allowed the team to
reject 99.9% of the protons, while selecting more than 95% of the electrons and positrons.
The resulting spectrum of the positron abundance relative to the sum of electrons and
positrons represents the highest statistics to date. Below 5 GeV, the obtained spectrum
XIV Preface

is significantly lower than previously measured. This discrepancy is believed to arise from
modulation of the cosmic rays induced by the strength of the solar wind, which changes
periodically through the solar cycle. At higher energies the new data unambiguously
confirm the rising trend of the positron fraction, which was suggested by previous mea-
surements. This appears highly incompatible with the usual scenario in which positrons
are produced by cosmic-ray nuclei interacting with atoms in the interstellar medium.
The additional source of positrons dominating at the higher energies could be the sig-
nature of dark matter decay or annihilation. In this case, PAMELA has already shown
that dark matter would have a preference for leptonic final states. They suggest that
the alternative origin of the positron excess at high energies is particle acceleration in
the magnetosphere of nearby pulsars producing electromagnetic cascades. The members
of the collaboration state that the PAMELA results presented here are insufficient to
distinguish between the two possibilities. They seem, however, confident that various
positron production scenarios will soon be testable. This will be possible once additional
PAMELA results on electrons, protons and light nuclei are published in the near future,
together with the extension of the positron spectrum up to 300 GeV thanks to ongoing
data acquisition.

S. Bertolucci, U. Bottigli and P. Oliva

This page intentionally left blank
 Società Italiana di Fisica
SCUOLA INTERNAZIONALE DI FISICA «E. FERMI»
CLXXV CORSO - VARENNA SUL LAGO DI COMO
VILLA MONASTERO 20 - 25 Luglio 2009
 1
2
4 11
5 8 10
3 6 9
27
7
26 24 22 15 14 12
30 28 23 21 20 16 13
31 29 19
18 17
25

32 33
34
35 36

1) A. Agostinelli 7) L. Caforio 13) P. Allegrini 19) P. Garosi 25) E. Gurpinar 31) L. Strolin
2) D. Caffarri 8) A. Silenzi 14) P. Bennati 20) G. Volpe 26) G. Sabatino 32) P. Oliva
3) A. Junkes 9) M. Siciliano 15) A. Di Canto 21) L. Velardi 27) M. Endrizzi 33) J. Marque
4) F. Bellini 10) D. Fasanella 16) F. Sforza 22) J. Lange 28) S. Tangaro 34) M. Mulders
5) B. Guerzoni 11) M. Nocente 17) M. V. Siciliano 23) D. Lattanzi 29) B. Alzani 35) U. Bottigli
6) V. Cavaliere 12) M. Bettuzzi 18) F. Albertin 24) L. Soung Yee 30) R. Brigatti 36) G. Riccobene
This page intentionally left blank
Detectors for medical physics

Notes from the lecture of Maria Giuseppina Bisogni

Università di Pisa, Dipartimento di Fisica “E. Fermi”
and INFN Sezione di Pisa - Pisa, Italy

A straightforward application of detection technologies developed in high-energy physics

is medical imaging.
Two main fields of medical imaging have to be covered by these detectors: morpho-
logical imaging and functional imaging. And the most used radiation type are X-rays or
gamma rays.
Since the beginning of morphological imaging the most used detector has been the
screen-film system. However, in the recent years digital detectors have become more and
more important. Digital imaging has several advantages with respect to conventional
imaging: the images can be displayed, stored and processed by a computer and can
be easily transferred from one site to another. Moreover digital detectors have a wider
dynamic range so the exposure is a less critical factor.
Digital detection can be performed in a direct on in an indirect way: in the first case
the radiation interacts directly with the detector, while in the second case it interacts
with a scintillator and the light produced in it is then detected by the digital detector.
A first example of digital detectors for medical imaging are Charge Coupled Devices
(CCD). They are based on the technology Metal Oxide Semiconductor (MOS). The
charge produced is stored in a potential well. The potential changes to make the charges
shift from one pixel to the next in a given column and there is a serial read-out with a
clock.
CCDs are generally coupled to scintillators CsI(Tl) to improve efficiency, so they are
indirect digital detectors.
Widely used indirect digital detectors are a-Si Flat Panels. They are made of a-Si:H
photodiodes (low dark current, high sensitivity to green light), coupled to CsI phosphors.
In order to improve efficiency by keeping spatial resolution high, the scintillator is made
of CsI:Tl needle crystals: their thickness is about 550 μm, which allows a good X-ray
absorption. The needles act as light guides, leading to a sharp point spread function.
Moreover CsI:Tl emits green light.
Examples of direct digital detection are a-Se Flat Panels. They are made of alloyed
a-Se with % As and with ppm Cl and the detection system is a TFT.
XIX
XX Detectors for medical physics

A challenging application of these detectors is digital mammography. In mammogra-

phy the details of interest are very low contrast ones (like tumor masses) or very small
details (like microcalcifications). So mammography is a demanding task for both effi-
ciency and spatial resolution.
A widely used indirect detection system is the GE Senographe 2000D that uses a Flat
Panel Digital Detector Si +CsI(Tl).
The total area covered by the detector is 18 × 24 cm2 and the pixel is 100 × 100 μm2 .
Nowadays also direct digital detectors are available (a-Se based flat panels) like Sele-
niaTM, LORAD-Hologic, Mammomat NovationDR Siemens.
A promising alternative to conventional integrating detectors are Single Photon Count-
ing (SPC) Systems. They allow efficient noise suppression, leading to a higher SNR or
lower dose, so they are particularly suited for low-event-rate applications.
They are linear whit exposure and have wider dynamic range (with respect to inte-
gration detectors), limited only by counter saturation.
They can allow an energy discrimination rejecting Compton events or X-ray fluores-
cences.
Also “energy weighting” (low-energy photons weight less than high-energy ones in
integrating systems) is suppressed because in SPC systems all photons have the same
weight.
Sectra MicroDose is the First SPC commercial mammographic system.
The SYRMEP Project (INFN GV, early ’90s) also developed an SPC detector. It
is an Edge-on Si strip detector. A silicon microstrip detector is used in the so-called
“edge-on” geometry matching the laminar geometry of the beam. The absorption length
seen by the impinging radiation is given by the strip length (∼ 100% in 1 cm of silicon
for 20 keV photons). There is almost complete scattering rejection. The pixel size is
determined by the strip pitch (H) times the detector thickness (V ). A drawback is that
the dead volume in front of the strip reduces the efficiency of the detector.
The Integrated Mammographic Imaging Project (IMI) is a collaboration between na-
tional universities, INFN and Industry which developed a mammography system demon-
strator based on GaAs pixel detectors. Photoelectric interaction probability is about
100% in the mammographic energy range (10–30 keV) for a 200 μm thick GaAs crystal.
So the detector is made of 200 μm thick GaAs bump-bonded to a Photon Counting
Chip (PCC). The detection unit presents a 18 × 24 cm2 exposure field. A 1D scanning is
performed by 9 × 2 assemblies in 26 exposures and the image is “off-line” reconstructed.
Another application of growing interest in medical imaging is the Computed Tomo-
graphy (CT). This imaging modality is intrinsically related to digital detector, since slice
images have to be reconstructed from actually acquired projection images by a specific
algorithm.
Current CTs are spiral CT, that acquire the whole volume of interest in a single
exposure by rotating continuously both the source and the detectors while the patient is
moving along his axial direction. By using multiple arrays of detectors it is now possible
to acquire more than one slice simultaneously. Modern systems can acquire up to 256
Detectors for medical physics XXI

different slices at the same time. The future of CT is the cone beam CT with a full area
detector, which will allow acquisition of large areas in a very small time.
Micro Computed Tomography is a technique for small fields of measurement (typically
5–50 mm). It is characterized by very-low-power X-ray sources (typically 5–50 W) and
long scan times (typically 5–30 minutes). It is devoted to the imaging of a specific organ
(bone, teeth, vessels, cancer) or to the imaging of samples (biopsies, excised materials)
or small animals (rats/mice) in vivo, ex vivo or in vitro.
Functional imaging is dedicated to the in vitro or in vivo measure of the intensity
of functional/metabolic processes occurring within a living body. Nuclear medicine uses
molecules or drugs marked with radioisotopes (radiotracer) for this kind of imaging.
The principle of radiotracer applications is that changing an atom in a molecule for
its radioisotope will not change its chemical and biological behavior significantly. As a
consequence, the movement, distribution, concentration of the molecule can be measured
by radiation detectors.
The two main imaging modalities used in nuclear medicine are SPECT (Single Photon
Emission CT) and PET (Positron Emission Tomography).
In SPECT the radiotracer emits one photon (for example 99m Tc, while in PET two
anticollinear photons are emitted by positron annihilation.
The main detector used in SPECT is the Gamma Camera, that is made of a Pb
collimator (that encodes the spatial information), a NaI (Tl) scintillation crystal and an
array of PMTs connected to amplifiers and positional logic circuits.
The principle is that many photomultiplier tubes “see” the same large scintillation
crystal; an electronic circuit decodes the coordinates of each event.
γ-rays (typically: 140 keV from 99m Tc) are emitted in all directions hence collimators
are required to determine the line of response. To perform a CT, in SPECT scanners
rotate around the patient.
In PET a tracer containing a β + emitting isotope is used. The emitted positron
annihilates in a short range (∼ 1 mm) emitting two antiparallel photons of 511 keV.
The signal detection is based on the coincidence detection at 180◦ , leading to a higher
sensitivity and a better signal/noise ratio than SPECT.
Detectors are usually scintillators coupled to a read-out device (typically a photomul-
tiplier, PMT), which can be arranged in a ring geometry or in a parallel-plate geometry.
Detectors are usually scintillators: the most often used is BGO (bismuth germanate,
Bi4 Ge3 O12 ) and more recently LSO (lutetium oxi-orto silicate, LuSiO).
In a block detector conventionally used in PET, a 2D array of crystals is attached
to 4 PMTs. Usually the array will be cut from a single crystal and the cuts filled with
light-reflecting material. When a photon is incident on one of the crystals, the resultant
light is shared by all 4 PMTs. Information on the position of the detecting crystal may
be obtained from the PMT outputs comparing them to pre-set values.
For more than 80 years, the PMT is the photodetector of choice to convert scintilla-
tion photons into electrical signals in most of the applications related to the radiation
detection. This is due to its high gain, low noise and fast response. Research is now
XXII Detectors for medical physics

moving to solid-state photodetectors that show the following advantages with respect to
PMTs:

– Compactness

– High quantum efficiency (to provide an energy resolution comparable to PMTs)

– Insensitivity to magnetic fields (PET/MRI)

TOF-PET (Time-of-Flight PET) systems exploit the time difference between the two
emitted photons to better locate the annihilation position. The limit in the annihilation
point location is mainly due to the error in the time difference measurement, namely the
time resolution Δt of the coincidence system. Time resolution is used by the reconstruc-
tion algorithm to locate the annihilation point Δx (Δx = cΔt/2).
Extensive work on TOF PET was done in the ’80s and several TOF PET cameras
were built and most of the advantages described here were experimentally verified.
But the scintillator materials used in the ’80s (BaF2 and CsF) had drawbacks (e.g.,
low density, low photofraction) which required other performance compromises, so BGO
dominated PET. Nowadays new scintillating materials like LSO (∼ 200 ps) and LaBr3
(< 100 ps) can provide outstanding timing resolution without other performance com-
promises, so TOF PET is experiencing a rebirth.
Simultaneous PET-CT systems are now available. PET needs CT data to anatom-
ically locate the tumor and to correct for the attenuation in order to provide a correct
quantification. Present systems exploit multislice CT top quality systems, where the
number of slices can reach 128 with rotation time of the order of 300 ms. Being the
attenuation coefficients (μ) energy dependent, the CT scanning at an average energy of
70 keV must be rescaled (voxel by voxel) to the gamma rays by using a bi-linear scaling
function.
Synchronization of PET-CT acquisitions with breath cycle minimizes motion effects
but limits the data statistics thus ultimately increasing the noise in the final image. The
use of non-rigid registrations (NRR) among gated-PET images leads to high-quality,
low-noise motion-free PET images.
An interesting alternative to PET-CT systems are PET-MR (PET and Magnetic
Resonance) systems which allow to combine function (PET) and anatomy and function
(MR). However there are technical challenges in realizing PET/MR systems. There is
interference on PET photomultiplier and electronics due to the static magnetic field and
to the RF and the gradient fields. There are also interferences on MR homogeneity
and gradients due to electromagnetic radiation from PET electronics, in maintaining
magnetic-field homogeneity. Moreover PET attenuation correction via MR data is a
challenge.
Regarding the optimal detection system for PET in PET-MR systems, two differ-
ent approaches are under investigation: scintillating crystals plus photomultiplier tubes
(PMT) or scintillating crystals plus solid-state light detectors. PMTs are well under-
stood, have stable electronics and high gain (106 ). However, Position Sensitive PMT
Detectors for medical physics XXIII

(PSPMT) operate in magnetic fields of 1 mT. A combination of distance (light guide)

and iron shield (1–2 mm of soft iron can further reduce 30 mT → 1 mT) is used to allow
PSPMT to operate in 1 mT. 1 mT has minimal effect on PSPMT performance. How-
ever long light guides reduce the energy resolution from 17 to 27%, but this should not
have too big an impact upon performance. Simultaneous and isocentric MR/PET mea-
surements can be performed. However, this system presents a small axial field of view
(FOV).
The alternative to PMTs are solid-state devices, like Avalanche Photodiodes (gain
∼ 150), Silicon Photomultiplier (gain ∼ 106 ). They are less well established than PET
detectors, but can operate in high static field greater than 7 T. However, there is still the
need to shield devices from both gradients and RF.

P. Oliva
This page intentionally left blank
Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”
Course CLXXV “Radiation and Particle Detectors”, edited by S. Bertolucci, U. Bottigli and P. Oliva
(IOS, Amsterdam; SIF, Bologna)
DOI 10.3254/978-1-60750-630-0-1

Detectors for hadrontherapy

G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, P. Lojacono, V. Mongelli,
S. Pittera and L. M. Valastro
INFN, Laboratori Nazionali dei Sud - Catania, Italy

S. Lo Nigro
Dipartimento di Fisica ed Astronomia, Università di Catania - Catania, Italy

L. Raffaele and V. Salamone

A.O.U. Policlinico, Università di Catania - Catania, Italy

M. G. Sabini
A.O. Cannizzaro - Catania, Italy

R. Cirio and F. Marchetto

Università di Torino e INFN, Sezione di Torino - Torino, Italy

Summary. — Proton therapy represents the most promising radiotherapy tech-

nique for external tumor treatments. At Laboratori Nazionali del Sud of the Istituto
Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN-LNS), Catania, Italy, a proton therapy facility
is active since March 2002 and 200 patients, mainly affected by choroidal and iris
melanoma, have been successfully treated. Proton beams are characterized by higher
dose gradients and linear energy transfer with respect to the conventional photon
and electron beams, commonly used in medical centers for radiotherapy. In this pa-
per, we report the experience gained in the characterization of different dosimetric
systems, studied and/or developed during the last ten years in our proton therapy
facility.


c Società Italiana di Fisica 1
2 G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, etc.

1. – Introduction

Proton therapy represents, today, the most promising radiotherapy technique for ex-
ternal tumor treatments. It exploits the physical and radiobiological properties of charged
ions to deliver selectively the dose to the tumor sparing the neighboring healthy tissues.
The proton therapy facility developed at INFN-LNS, in collaboration with the Radio-
logical Institute of Catania University is active since March 2002 and 200 patients have
been treated. Nowadays, about twelve proton therapy centers are active around the
world and more the 9000 patient have been already treated in total. Nevertheless, ra-
diation therapy with protons still represents a pioneering technique and improvements
are required in treatment clinical protocols as well as in dosimetry procedures. Proton
beams are characterized by higher dose gradients and linear energy transfer with respect
to the conventional photon and electron beams, commonly used in medical center for ra-
diotherapy. For these reasons, detectors and new materials are continually tested to find
better solutions for relative and absolute proton dosimetry. In this paper, we report the
experience gained in the characterization of different dosimetric systems, studied and/or
developed during the last ten years in our proton therapy facility. Particular attention
to the parallel-plate ionization chamber with the anode segmented in strips, and on the
relative dosimetry with natural and CVD diamonds, TLD MOSFET dosimeters is paid.

2. – Irradiation configuration

A proton beam is suitable for radiation treatment purposes if its spatial distribution
permits the irradiation of the whole tumors volume sparing the healthy tissues surround-
ing the lesion. It must be spread both in the longitudinal and transversal directions
using energy modulators and scattering systems, respectively. A proton beam longitudi-
nally spread is obtained using the modulator wheel and is called Spread Out Bragg Peak
(SOBP). Dosimetry of a clinical proton beam implies determination of absorbed dose
at the isocenter and reconstruction of dose distributions in a tissue-equivalent phantom.
The choice of the dosimeter will depend on several factors, such as the accuracy, sensi-
tivity and size of the detector’s sensitive area with respect to beam spot size, as well as
dose gradients involved. In the case of the absorbed dose determination the use of an
“absolute” calibrated dosimeter is required.
.
2 1. Absolute dose determination: beam calibration. – An extensive description of the
CATANA proton therapy facility and its related main clinical results can be found in [1]
and [2]. The absolute proton beam dosimetry is performed using a plane-parallel Ad-
vanced PTW 34045 Markus Ionization Chamber. The Markus chamber has an electrode
spacing of 1 mm, a sensitive air volume of 0.02 cm3 and a collector electrode diameter of
5.4 mm. The dose measurements are performed in a water phantom, according to the
International Atomic Energy Agency Technical Report Series (IAEA TRS) 398 Code of
practice [3]. The absorbed dose to water per monitor unit (cGy/M.U.) is measured at
the isocenter, at the middle of SOBP, using the reference circular collimator (diameter
φ = 25 mm), for each combination of modulator and range shifter used for treatment [3].
Detectors for hadrontherapy 3

.
2 2. Depth dose distribution. – Depth dose curves both for full energy and modu-
lated proton beams should be acquired in water as recommended by the International
Protocols [3].
.
2 3. Lateral dose distribution. – Also transversal dose measurements should be per-
formed in water or in a water-equivalent phantom with a detector having high spatial
resolution in the scan direction. Silicon diodes, radiographic films and small ionization
chambers may be used for reconstruction of lateral dose distributions [1].

3. – Detectors for relative dosimetry

As in conventional radiotherapy, clinical proton dosimetry requires the measurements

of central-axis depth dose distributions, transverse beam profiles and output factors.
.
3 1. Depth dose reference detectors. – Central-axis depth dose measurements for un-
modulated and modulated proton beams are performed with a PTW parallel-plate Ad-
vanced Markus chamber in a water phantom. It is a perturbation-free version of the
classic Markus chamber, because of the wide guard ring and the smaller electrode spac-
ing (1 mm) and, for the relative measurements, it is positioned at the center of a circular
field 25 mm in diameter with the phantom surface located at the isocentre. The high
electric field strength (4000 V cm−1 ) provides a complete ion collection for dose rate up
to 100 Gy min−1 in the continuous beam of the Superconducting Cyclotron.
.
3 2. Reference detectors for transversal dose. – Transverse and diagonal dose profiles of
the modulated proton beams are measured, in the middle of the SOBP, with radiochromic
films oriented normal to the beam axis. They assure high-resolution two-dimensional
dosimetry in radiation fields with high dose gradients, such as clinical proton beams. The
new Gafchromic TM EBT (ISP Corporation New Jersey) radiochromic film was adopted
from 2005 because of the higher sensitivity than HS and MD552, the latter extensively
used in the last years for radiotherapy applications. The EBT films are scanned with
the Epson Expression 1680 ProTM RGB flatbed scanner in transmission mode, using
the FilmScan and FilmCal modules of the MePHYSTO mc2 PTW software; all EBT
films are scanned in the 48-bit RGB mode, resolution of 127 dpi (0.2 mm), but only
the red color channel image is used and saved in TIFF file format. The FilmAnalysis
module of the MePHYSTO mc2 PTW software was used for dosimetric evaluation of
the EBT images. The film uniformity, evaluated according to AAPM report n. 63 [4],
resulted to be smaller than 1.5% for the 5 × 5 cm2 square EBT sheets, used for dose
profile measurements in small eye protontherapy beams. The dose response curve (pixel
value vs. dose) in the normal orientation for the reference collimator measured in a solid
water phantom at the deph of the middle of the SOBP, is well represented in the range
0.25–7 Gy by a third-order polynomial fit; the film response resulted to be independent of
the residual ranges at the irradiation deph in the range of 6 (25 MeV) to 15 mm (40 MeV);
corresponding to residual ranges associated to the SOBP of the eye protontherapy. As
a consequence, only one calibration file is needed to evaluate films exposed at different
4 G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, etc.

Table I. – Transverse performance of a proton beam profile with EBT GafchromicTM films.

EBTX EBTY

P (mm) 1.01 1.08

H 0.92 0.92
ST (%) 103.0 102.31
W95% (mm) 22.0 21.81

depths. In table I beam penumbra (P ), uniformity (H), symmetry (ST (%)) and the
useful treatment field (W95% (mm)) (defined as the field width between the 95% points
for 25 mm diameter collimator) are shown.

4. – Relative detectors
.
4 1. Natural and CVD diamond . – The properties of natural and synthetic diamond
CVD (Chemical Vapor Deposition) as radiation detectors are now known. These ma-
terials are tissue equivalent, non-toxic, resistant to radiation damage; they also show a
high sensitivity, low leakage current and a good time resolution [5]. In particular, syn-
thetic CVD diamond presents the additional advantage that can be manufactured with
a controlled amount of impurities at relative low cost. Our studies were focused on the
dosimetric behaviour of natural and CVD diamonds. They confirmed the favorable prop-
erties of these detectors, not only for high-energy photons and electrons therapy beams
but also for a 62 MeV therapeutical proton beam. In particular, after a pre-irradiation,
diamond detectors have an excellent time stabitity of sensibility. All the results obtained
in our study are reported in the bibliography [6, 7].
.
4 2. Termoluminescence detectors (TLD). – The TLD are widely used in conventional
radiation therapy, their use in the field of proton therapy is relatively new and thanks
to our experience we obtained good results. In fact we believe TLDs could provide an
effective solution when dosimetry of small fields is required with negligible perturbation
of the irradiation beam. These can be the case in the dose mapping and absolute dose
measurements for the eye treatment with protons beams. Following our experience we
decided to use a group of TLD-100 microcubes (1 × 1 × 1 mm3 ) and ribbons (3 × 3 ×
0.4 mm3 ) of LiF: Mg, Ti produced by Harshaw Company. Annealing of the TLD material
before the irradiation of the dosimeters has been done using the following standard
procedure: 1 h heating in an oven at 400 ◦ C; cooling at room temperature; 2 h heating in
an oven at 100 ◦ C; cooling at room temperature. A sensitivity factor has been attributed
to each detector by irradiating all the dosimeters in the same geometrical set-up with a
dose of 1 Gy [8]. Dosimeters were analyzed with a Harshaw 3500 reader. In these years
of CATANA activity we applied TLD for different purposes: calibration at different
quality beams (photons, protons, carbon ions), dose profiles, depth doses, Bragg peak
Detectors for hadrontherapy 5

Fig. 1. – Transverse dose distribution obtained with TLD detectors and compared with the
output of silicon diode. The y-axis represents the detectors responde in terms of normalized
absorbed dose.

either unmodulated and modulated, output factors. We demonstrated that the same
calibration curve used for photons can be also used in proton beams [9].
In fig. 1 the possibility to use TLD for transverse dose measurements is well demon-
strated. The optimal agreement with silicon diode has been noted. The TLD may be used
also for the reconstruction of the Bragg peak, but there is a large dependence from the
radiation LET, as shown in fig. 2 [10]. On the other hand, a good agreement can be found
for the reconstruction of a typical clinical Spread Out Bragg Peak, as shown in fig. 3.
Finally, a study on the radiation damage caused by high let particles as proton beams
has been carried out. It demonstrated the need of a periodical TLD calibration to take
into account the change in sensitivity due to radiation damage [11].
.
4 3. MOSFET dosimetry. – Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor (MOS-
FET) detectors were proposed as a clinical radiation dosimetry, [12, 13] and the use of
a dual bias dual MOSFET showed a better linearity, reproducibility and stability with
respect to single MOSFET detector [14]. They are emerging as a versatile tool in var-
ious medical applications, particularly in patient dose verification [15] and in modern
radiation oncology and diagnostic modality [16, 17]. The advantages of the MOSFET
dosimeters include small size, immediate readout and reuse, facility of use, compactness,
permanent dose storage. They are isotropic, dose rate and temperature independent.
The details of the working principle of the MOSFET have been reported earlier [18,19].
6 G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, etc.

Fig. 2. – Proton Bragg peak reconstructed with TLD detectors and compared with the Markus
ionization chamber and a silicon diode response.

Fig. 3. – Spread Out Bragg Peak (SOBP) reconstructed with TLD detectors and compared with
a silicon diode response.
Detectors for hadrontherapy 7

Fig. 4. – Output factors for MOSFET, microMOSFET and other detectors used in the proton-
therapy routine.

Considering this favorable dosimetric characteristics of the MOSFET dosimetry, a

preliminary study (linearity, reproducibility, sensitivity, energy dependence) on the use
of the MOSFET dosimeters, using 62 MeV proton beams is performed. In particular,
in this work, the MOSFET and microMOSFET Output Factor (OF) for small radiation
fields in proton therapy are presented. Their results are compared with those obtained
with other detectors chosen for the same dosimetric test. The investigated devices are
the commercially available MOSFET (TN-502RD) and microMOSFET (TN-502RDM),
manufactured by Best Medical Canada Ltd, (Ottawa, Canada). The microMOSFET is a
commercial name for the MOSFET dosimeter with a small physical size of 1 mm × 1 mm
and 1.5 mm thick. This physical size is about half the size of the standard MOSFET
dosimeter. In order to verify the possibility to use the MOSFET and microMOSFET as
dosimeters for small radiation fields in proton therapy, measurements of Output Factor
OF(ϕ), defined as L(ϕ)/L(ϕ0 ), where L(ϕ) and L(ϕ0 ) are the detector responses for clin-
ical shaped collimator and for reference collimator, respectively. The irradiation setup
was the following: the MOSFET, or the microMOSFET dosimeter, was positioned at
the centre depth of a SOBP and irradiated with a fixed dose of 200 cGy. The measure-
ments were carried out with five different collimator diameters: 8, 10, 15, 20 and 25 mm.
The results were compared with those obtained with TLD-100 microcubes, Scanditronix
silicon diode (PFD) and radiochromic film MD55-2.
The results obtained with MOSFET and microMOSFET are reported in fig. 4,
normalized to the reference collimator (ϕ0 = 25 mm), and compared with the OF(ϕ)
measured with TLD-100 microcubes, silicon diode and radiochromic film. As shown in
8 G. A. P. Cirrone, G. Cuttone, F. Di Rosa, etc.

fig. 4, the MOSFET OF(ϕ) are, in every case, lower than the corresponding OF silicon
diode, radiochromic film and TLD microcubes.
The maximum difference found is about 9% with respect to radiochromic film, for
8 mm diameter collimator. The microMOSFET OF(ϕ) are close to the results of the diode
and the radiochromic film. The maximum difference found is about 1.4% with respect
to radiochromic film and silicon diode, for 8 mm diameter collimator. This percentage
difference is comparable with the experimental uncertainty in the measurement of the
Output Factor. The results of MOSFET OF(ϕ) show the possibility to use the MOSFET
dosimeter for field diameter from 15 to 25 mm. Instead, the microMOSFET results show
that they can represent an alternative to the use of the silicon diode, currently used
in dose measurements of the small radiation field, involved in proton therapy of uveal
melanoma.
.
4 4. MOPI . – Inside the CATANA facility particular care is devoted to the con-
trol of beam shape and symmetry during the patient irradiation. For these purposes,
in collaboration with the INFN Section of Torino (Italy), a special transmission detec-
tor was developed [20]. The detector is composed of two strips ionization chambers,
ortogonally disposed, and located along the beam axis. The detector consists of two
contiguous gas cells, each cell being externally limited by an anode plane and having
the cathode in common. The anode is made by a kapton foil 35 μm thick covered with
a 15 μm thick aluminium layer. This layer has been engraved with a standard printed
circuit board technique to obtain 256 conductive strips 400 μm wide interspaced with
100 μm of electrically isolated kapton. The detector sensitive area is 12.8 × 12.8 cm2
and is sourronded on three sides by a guard ring which is set to same voltage of the
strips. On the fourth side the strips are narrowed and bent to reach the connector.
The electric field is generated by polarizing the cathode to −500 V, while the other
end of the field is provided by the strip polarization which is at +2 V (the same volt-
age as the input front-end). The described detector permits us the on-line control of
the beam shape and symmetry during the irradiation. We defined a specific param-
eter, mathematically defined as skewness [20]. It contains the desired information on
beam quality. The skewness monitoring during the irradiation represents a fundamental
method to ensure the quality of proton treatment and provide an high level check of the
beam.

5. – Conclusions

Ten years of proton therapy activity has permitted the test of various detectors and
materials. Many national and international collaborations have been established and a
large amount of scientific papers has been published. These results allow us to affirm
that our facility represents an ideal workbench for the test of dosimetric system in proton
therapy and give unique possibility in Italy for the improvement of the proton therapy
technique.
Detectors for hadrontherapy 9

REFERENCES

[1] Cirrone G. A. P., Cuttone G., Lojacono P. A., Lo Nigro S., Mongelli V., Patti
V. I., Privitera G., Raffaele L., Rifuggiato D., Sabini M. G., Salamone V.,
Spatola C. and Valastro L. M., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 51 (2004) 860.
[2] Spatola C., Privitera G., Raffaele L., Salamone V., Cuttone G. M., Cirrone
G. A. P. and Sabini M. G., Tumori, 89 (2003) 502.
[3] Absorbed Dose Determination in External Beam Radiotherapy: An International Code of
Practice for Dosimetry based on Standards of Absorbed Dose to Water, IAEA Technical
Report Series-398 (2000).
[4] Radiochromic Film Dosimetry, Recommendations of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee
Task Group No. 55, AAPM Report No. 63 (1998).
[5] Vatnitsky S. M et al., Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 47 (1993) 515.
[6] Cirrone G. A. P., Cuttone G. M., Lo Nigro S., Mongelli V., Raffaele L., Sabini
M. G., Valastro L., Bucciolini M. and Onori S., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.
A, 552 (2005) 197.
[7] Cirrone G. A. P., Cuttone G. M., Lo Nigro S. et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.),
150 (2006) 330.
[8] Bucciolini M., Cuttone G., Egger E., Sabini M. G., Raffaele L., Cirrone
G. A. P., Lo Nigro S. and Valastro L., Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 101 (2002) 453.
[9] Bucciolini M., Cuttone G., Egger E., Mazzocchi S., Guasti A., Raffaele L. and
Sabini M. G., Physica Medica, XV (1999) 71.
[10] Bucciolini M., Cuttone G., Guasti E. et al., Physica Medica, XVI (2000) 131.
[11] Sabini M. G., Bucciolini M., Cuttone G. et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.
A, 476 (2002) 779.
[12] Butson M., Rozenfeld A., Mathur J. N., Carolan M., Wong T. P. Y. and
Metcalfe J., Med. Phys., 23 (1996) 655.
[13] Ramani R., Russell S. et al., Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 37 (1997) 959.
[14] Soubra M., Cygler J., Mackay G. et al., Med. Phys., 21 (1994) 567.
[15] Scalchi P. and Francescon P., Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 40 (1998) 987.
[16] Chuang C. F., Verhey L. J. and Xia P., Med. Phys., 29 (2002) 1109.
[17] Rosenfeld A. B., Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 101 (2002) 393.
[18] Holmes-Siedle A., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 121 (1974) 169.
[19] Cirrone G. A. P., Cuttone G. M. et al., Physica Medica, XXII (2006) 78.
[20] Givenchi N., Marchetto f. et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 572 (2007)
1094.
This page intentionally left blank
Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”
Course CLXXV “Radiation and Particle Detectors”, edited by S. Bertolucci, U. Bottigli and P. Oliva
(IOS, Amsterdam; SIF, Bologna)
DOI 10.3254/978-1-60750-630-0-11

Detection setups in applications of accelerator-based

techniques to the analysis of Cultural Heritage
P. A. Mandò
Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Università di Firenze
and INFN, Sezione di Firenze - Firenze, Italy

Summary. — This paper has been written following the two lectures given by the
author on the same subject at the CLXXV Course Radiation and Particle Detectors,
of the International “E. Fermi” School in Varenna, but should not be considered in
itself a comprehensive text on the subject. The basic principles of Ion Beam Analysis
(used to deduce the composition of a target material) and of Accelerator Mass
Spectrometry (used to deduce the concentration of rare isotopes in a sample) are
recalled, and the solutions implemented for their application in the field of Cultural
Heritage are described. In particular, the specific requirements for the detectors and
for some beam control systems along the lines of the accelerator are discussed in
some detail.

Introduction: Why Science for Cultural Heritage?

The “objective” aspects of the manufacts (age, composition, structure, techniques

employed to produce them) are worth studying for a number of reasons, e.g.,
– attribution and authentication

– understanding the technological skills in the past


c Società Italiana di Fisica 11
12 P. A. Mandò

– learning about materials used in a given period and production area: the detection
of materials known to be locally unavailable can, e.g., prove the existence of trade
exchanges from distant areas, which in ancient times is far from being obvious

– detecting deterioration processes of the work

– deciding on an informed basis the most appropriate techniques and materials to be

used for a restoration.

As a consequence of the acknowledged importance of such motivations, the impact of

scientific investigations on Cultural Heritage (CH) has greatly increased in recent years.
In general, the characteristics required to the techniques used for analysis in this field
are minimum destructivity or, better, non-destructivity at all; minimum invasiveness,
i.e. minimum sampling or no sampling at all; in the latter case, when the works are
directly analysed without picking up samples, no damage must arise; the analytical
response should be as “complete” as possible, quantitative and characterised by the
highest possible accuracy and precision.
Although probably not so well known to many, accelerator-based nuclear techniques
can fulfil these requirements, so that they are frequently used in applications to problems
concerning works of art, or of historical and archaeological importance.
Two nuclear techniques play an especially important role in this field: Accelerator
Mass Spectrometry (AMS), which is nowadays the fundamental tool for radiocarbon dat-
ing, and Ion Beam Analysis (IBA), which can provide elemental composition of materials
in paintings, drawings, sculptures, and any other manufact. Both AMS and IBA require
detection systems for charged particles, X-rays, gamma-rays. The detectors themselves
are usually (although not always) relatively standard, but the skill of the experimenter
is anyway required to create detection setups that can optimize their performance when
the particular constraints in applications to CH are kept into account: for instance, the
requirement of ultra-low currents for the ion beam analysis of manufacts of great value
(to ensure no damage to the precious works) implies that detection efficiencies must be
higher than those still acceptable for other applications of the same techniques.
These lectures will briefly describe examples of specific setups devised with just this
kind of requirement in mind.

Ion Beam Analysis (IBA)

Ion Beam Analysis provides the composition of a material, by using it as a target for
beam particle bombardment (typically proton or alpha beams at some MeV energy). The
detection of the beam-induced emitted radiation (X- or gamma-rays, light, particles, etc.)
allows us to infer the composition of the material, because the energies of the emitted
radiation are characteristic of the target atoms, or nuclei. The main IBA techniques are
classified according to which kind of interaction between beam particle and atom (or
nucleus) is exploited:
Detection setups in applications of accelerator-based techniques etc. 13

– PIXE (Particle-Induced X-ray Emission) is a consequence of interactions of beam

particles with atomic electrons: when inner shell ionizations are produced, the
consequent prompt electronic transitions, from outer shells to the hole created,
lead to emissions of X rays at energies characteristic of the atomic species.

– PIGE (Particle-Induced Gamma-ray Emission) is a consequence of inelastic interac-

tions of beam particles with nuclei; these are excited and de-excite through prompt
emission of gamma rays with energies characteristic of the specific nucleus.

– PESA (Particle Elastic Scattering Analysis) exploits elastic interactions with nu-
clei; the particle scattered at a given angle has an energy that depends on the
mass of the target nucleus. The rather well known technique of RBS (Rutherford
Backscattering Analysis) is the most common among PESA techniques.

In general, the features of IBA, and PIXE in particular, are such that they are very
well suited for CH studies. The main feature ensuring no damage is the possibility to
use very low beam currents, thanks to the high cross-section values of the processes
exploited by IBA. A sort of “must” for these applications is the use of external beams,
so as to keep the “target” in its natural atmospheric environment. When using external
beams there is no need to pick up samples (non-invasiveness) regardless of the size of
the work to be analysed. Besides, handling and moving the “target” is much easier.
Keeping the works in atmosphere during the measurements also helps to avoid damage
(e.g. certain materials might deteriorate owing to dehydration in vacuum). With external
beam IBA the time for each analysis can be very short because of the high yields and
also thanks to the ease of handling the works in the external setup. Thus, many runs
are possible in order to obtain statistically more representative results. Since they are
non-destructive, the measurements can be repeated (with the same or other techniques)
for further checks. Finally, by varying beam energy, intensity and size one can easily find
optimum experimental conditions for any given specific problem, and complementary
information can be gained “free” when different “signals” (X-rays, gamma rays, particles)
are simultaneously recorded.
With an external beam you can easily investigate in a non-destructive way the ma-
terial composition of really many kinds of artworks (paintings, drawings, paperwork,
glassware, ceramics, metal manufacts, etc.). External beam setups imply some peculiar
considerations regarding their required detection setups, which will be discussed below.
Among IBA techniques, PIXE has the widest range of simultaneously detectable
elements, and is characterised by very high cross-sections (fig. 1). It is therefore the
“most important” IBA technique for CH.
Since —as can be seen from fig. 1 (log scale!)— cross-sections strongly decrease for
higher-Z elements, to implement sensitive analysis from the lowest- to the highest-Z
elements, one must exploit for the latter their L X-rays. From this consideration and
from the K and L X-ray energies of the different elements (displayed in fig. 2) one can
thus infer that, in order to be sensitive to elements from Na to the highest-Z through
either K or L X-rays, a good detection efficiency is required over an energy range from
14 P. A. Mandò

Fig. 1. – X-ray production cross-sections (left: for K series, right: for L series) by proton
bombardment, versus beam energy. Examples are shown for some different elements.

about 1 keV to about 30 keV. This is not straightforward to be achieved and requires
some special arrangements to be devised for the detection systems.
To understand why, some considerations are preliminarily needed concerning quanti-
tative PIXE analysis.

Quantitative PIXE . – In the following, we will assume the standard detection ge-
ometry with the X-ray detector placed backwards with respect to the incoming beam

Fig. 2. – Energies of the main X-ray lines as a function of element Z.

Detection setups in applications of accelerator-based techniques etc. 15

direction (i.e. on the same side of the target surface). This is required in particular for
thick targets, in order to allow for X-ray transmission to the detector without absorp-
tion in the target (as would happen with a detector placed behind the target, i.e. in a
forward geometry). For the sake of simplicity, let us first consider the X-ray yield ob-
tained by bombarding a thin target. Here, “thin” means that: 1) the beam energy loss in
traversing the target can be neglected (i.e. all beam interactions can be assumed to occur
at the same energy); 2) X-rays produced by the beam within the target —at any depth
from the surface— can escape towards the detector with negligible absorption probability
(no “self-absorption” effect). Both 1) and 2) depend on the target matrix composition.
Self-absorption, however, is also strongly dependent on the X-ray energy (lower-energy
X-rays are much more severely absorbed) and therefore on the atomic number Z of the
element to be detected: the lower the Z, the lower the X-ray energy, and therefore the
more stringent the requirement of small thickness for a target to be considered “thin”
with respect to the detection of that element. As a matter of fact, one can easily see
that, under typical PIXE measuring conditions, a target of up to, let us say, few tens of
μg cm−2 , can still reasonably be considered thin for the detection of all elements down
to Na. The beam energy loss is negligible (in terms of its effect on X-ray production
cross-section) for a typical proton beam of 2–3 MeV energy, and also negligible is the
X-ray self-absorption in the target, even for X-rays down to 1 keV, i.e. Na K X-rays.
In the hypothesis of a thin target, the yield of detected X-rays (Yz ) from a given
element of atomic number Z in the target is simply given by the product of

– X-ray production cross-section σX at the beam incident energy,

NAvog
– number of atoms of the element Z per unit target area, AZ ρZ t, with t the target
thickness,
Q
– number of incident beam particles (can be expressed as e, with Q the beam charge
fluence during the run and e the elementary charge),

– detection efficiency, which, in turn, is the product of:

– geometric efficiency (solid angle Ω/4π)

– intrinsic detector efficiency εdet
– transmission αZ through the absorbers possibly present between X-ray emis-
sion point and detector.

In summary, one has

   
NAvog Q Ω
(1) YZ = σX ρZ t εdet αZ .
AZ e 4π

We have seen in fig. 1 which are the X-ray production cross-sections. Let us now dis-
cuss the other parameters affecting the X-ray yield. Figures 3 and 4 show the calculated
values of the transmission coefficient αZ through various media, as a function of X-ray
16 P. A. Mandò

Fig. 3. – Transmission vs. X-ray energy through different gaseous media.

energy. Figure 3 refers to a gas medium and clearly shows that even a few centimeters
of air strongly attenuate X-rays of low energy. If, instead of air, the path from the X-
ray origin (the impact point of the beam on the target) to the detector is flooded with
helium, the transmission of even the 1 keV X-rays of Na is again almost 100%. However,
even a small amount of residual air, as can be seen, is critical at such low energies. Fig-
ure 4 instead shows the effect on transmission of a Mylar absorber: it can be seen that
even through a thin layer (the example in the figure refers to 425 μm thickness) X-rays
of low-Z elements are not transmitted at all, and those of medium-Z elements are still
remarkably affected. These considerations are useful to design an appropriate detection
setup; the topic will be discussed below.
Figure 5 shows the intrinsic detection efficiency εdet of commercial Si(Li) detectors
for X-rays. Intrinsic detection efficiency is the fraction of X-rays that after reaching the
detector surface produce a full energy signal from the detector (photoelectric absorption
within the detector’s active volume). As one can see, the efficiency is substantially 100%
in a range of X-ray energies from a few keV to about 15 keV. The efficiency drop at low
energies is due to the effect of the detector entrance window (the three curves refer indeed
to three different Be window thickness values); the drop at high energy depends on the
limited thickness of the detector-sensitive volume (the two curves refer to active volume
thickness values of 3 and 5 mm, with that corresponding to 5 mm extending indeed with
higher efficiency towards higher X-ray energies).
In summary, the intrinsic efficiencies of these commercial detectors can be reasonably
high (above 40%) within a range of X-ray energies from 1 keV to 30–35 keV.
Recently, Silicon Drift Detectors (SDD) [2] are increasingly used for X-ray detection
instead of Si(Li) detectors. SDDs are characterized by a much smaller active thickness
(500 μm maximum), and therefore a lower intrinsic efficiency at the high-energy end of
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com