G. W. Bennett
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by G. W. Bennett.
Physical Review D | 2009
G. W. Bennett; B. Bousquet; H. N. Brown; G. Bunce; R. M. Carey; P. Cushman; G. T. Danby; P. T. Debevec; M. Deile; H. Deng; S. Dhawan; V. P. Druzhinin; L. Duong; E. Efstathiadis; F. J. M. Farley; G. V. Fedotovich; S. Giron; F. Gray; D. Grigoriev; M. Grosse-Perdekamp; A. Grossmann; M. F. Hare; David W. Hertzog; X. Huang; V. W. Hughes; M. Iwasaki; K. Jungmann; D. Kawall; M. Kawamura; B. I. Khazin
G.W. Bennett, B. Bousquet, H.N. Brown, G. Bunce, R.M. Carey, P. Cushman, G.T. Danby, P.T. Debevec, M. Deile, H. Deng, W. Deninger, S.K. Dhawan, V.P. Druzhinin, L. Duong, E. Efstathiadis, F.J.M. Farley, G.V. Fedotovich, S. Giron, F.E. Gray, D. Grigoriev, M. Grosse-Perdekamp, A. Grossmann, M.F. Hare, D.W. Hertzog, X. Huang, V.W. Hughes, M. Iwasaki, K. Jungmann, D. Kawall, M. Kawamura, B.I. Khazin, J. Kindem, F. Krienen, I. Kronkvist, A. Lam, R. Larsen, Y.Y. Lee, I. Logashenko, R. McNabb, W. Meng, J. Mi, J.P. Miller, Y. Mizumachi, W.M. Morse, D. Nikas, C.J.G. Onderwater, Y. Orlov, C.S. Özben, J.M. Paley, Q. Peng, C.C. Polly, J. Pretz, R. Prigl, G. zu Putlitz, T. Qian, S.I. Redin, O. Rind, B.L. Roberts, N. Ryskulov, S. Sedykh, Y.K. Semertzidis, P. Shagin, Yu.M. Shatunov, E.P. Sichtermann, E. Solodov, M. Sossong, A. Steinmetz, L.R. Sulak, C. Timmermans, A. Trofimov, D. Urner, P. von Walter, D. Warburton, D. Winn, A. Yamamoto and D. Zimmerman (Muon (g − 2) Collaboration) Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215 Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973 Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia LEPP, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 Fairfield University, Fairfield, CT 06430 6 Kernfysisch Versneller Instituut, University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA, Groningen, The Netherlands 7 Physikalisches Institut der Universität Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany 8 Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801 9 KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801, Japan Department of Physics, University. of Minnesota., Minneapolis, MN 55455 11 Science University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 153-8902, Japan 12 Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo, 152-8551, Japan 13 Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520 † Deceased
Science | 1978
G. W. Bennett; J. O. Archambeau; B. E. Archambeau; J. I. Meltzer; C. L. Wingate
Heavy charged particle beams can be widely used for cancer therapy if control in heterogeneous tissue is proved practical. A beam of protons at 200 million electron volts has been visualized in plastic and in a living animal by using an on-line positron camera. The fraction of the activity retained in the radiation site was found to be at least 70 percent of that produced in a dead animal. The sensitivity of the technique was established for a typical geometry.
Radiology | 1974
John O. Archambeau; G. W. Bennett; Gerald S. Levine; Richard L. Cowen; Atsuo Akanuma
Physical, technical, radiological, and clinical status of proton therapy is reviewed. Protons produce effects similar to those of x rays, but dose distribution and range make protons more flexible and useful therapeutically. The ability to confine the major fraction of proton absorbed dose to a designated volume allows the decrease of dose to normal tissue or the increase of dose to the cancer. Improved dose distribution is quantified by determining the ratio of normal tissue dose for x rays to that for protons in different treatment plans. Normal tissue integral dose from x-ray therapy is generally 2 to 5 times as high as that anticipated from proton therapy.
Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Section A-accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated Equipment | 2003
Yannis K. Semertzidis; G. W. Bennett; E. Efstathiadis; F. Krienen; Richard Larsen; Y. Y. Lee; W. M. Morse; Yuri F. Orlov; C. Ozben; B. Lee Roberts; L. Snydstrup; D. Warburton
The design, construction, and operation of the electrostatic quadrupoles used in the muon ðg � 2Þ experiment E821 of BNL are described in detail. A new lead design allowed the construction of a very reliable system which could operate for hundreds of thousands pulses with no sparking. The new design also made possible the elimination of systematic errors associated with the E; B fields generated by the low energy trapped electrons present in Penning traps under medium vacuum conditions. r 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science | 1983
Y. Bizais; I. G. Zubal; R. W. Rowe; G. W. Bennett; A. B. Brill
Emission tomography using two orthogonal sets of projections through seven pinhole collimators is considered. This paper describes the acquisition system, the reconstruction algorithm, presents results obtained in phantom studies, and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of this method over conventional Seven Pinhole Tomography.
Medical Physics | 1977
G. W. Bennett; John O. Archambeau
The depth of penetration of heavy charged-particle therapy beams is sensitive to the density of tissues traversed. Maximum depth of dose contours will vary appreciably as the beam passes through bone, muscle, lung, and air or gas. Calculations suggest that beam activation of the short-lived positron-emitting isotope 15O in vivo will permit localization of proton therapy beams with resonable detected-event density and dose. Preliminary tests of this method indicate that the beam can be located at depth with a typical dose of 15 rad, using a large field-of-view positron camera on-ling. This technique is also applicable to other heavy charged-particle beams, negative pions, and heavy ions.
Medical Physics | 1977
Catharine L. Wingate; John O. Archambeau; Andreas Koehler; G. W. Bennett
Accurate bolus is needed for extension of Bragg-peak therapy. Proton beam-stopping profiles in a lucite-styrofoam-tissue phantom and in a Rando phantom were recorded photographically. Air volumes caused the largest distortions. Lucite bolus was cut to achieve desired beam-stopping profiles. Verification of bolus effect in situ will be important to control beam penetration within 5 mm.
arXiv: High Energy Physics - Experiment | 2005
E.P. Sichtermann; G. W. Bennett; B. Bousquet; H. N. Brown; G. Bunce; R. M. Carey; P. Cushman; G. T. Danby; P. T. Debevec; M. Deile; H. Deng; S. Dhawan; V. P. Druzhinin; L. Duong; E. Efstathiadis; F. J. M. Farley; G. V. Fedotovich; S. Giron; F. E. Gray; D. Grigoriev; M. Grosse-Perdekamp; A. Grossmann; M. F. Hare; D. W. Hertzog; X. Huang; V. W. Hughes; M. Iwasaki; K. Jungmann; D. Kawall; B. I. Khazin
The Muon g ‐ 2 collaboration has measured the anomalous magnetic g value, a = (g ‐ 2)/2, of the positive muon with an unprecedented uncertainty of 0.7 parts per million. The result aμ+(expt) = 11659204(7)(5) × 10−10, based on data collected in the year 2000 at Brookhaven National Laboratory, is in good agreement with the preceeding data on aμ+ and aμ−. The measurement tests standard model theory, which at the level of the current experimental uncertainty involves quantum electrodynamics, quantum chromodynamics, and electroweak interaction in a significant way.
arXiv: High Energy Physics - Experiment | 2003
B.L. Roberts; R. M. Carey; E. Efstathiadis; M. F. Hare; X. Huang; F. Krienen; A. Lam; I. Logashenko; J. P. Miller; J. M. Paley; Q. Peng; O. Rind; L. Sulak; A. Trofimov; G. W. Bennett; H. N. Brown; G. Bunce; G. T. Danby; R.C. Larsen; Y. Y. Lee; W. Meng; J. Mi; W. M. Morse; D. Nikas; C. Ozben; R. Prigl; Yannis K. Semertzidis; D. Warburton; Y. Orlov; Klaus-Peter Jungmann
The muon (g - 2) experiment is described, and the recent results are presented. These results represent the final measurement for the positive muon.
IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science | 1982
Gerald Q. Maguire Jr.; A. B. Brill; Marilyn E. Noz; G. W. Bennett; James H. Schimpf; Steven C. Horii; Y. Yonekura; M. P. Zeleznik; Y. Bizais; B. S. Baxter; I. G. Zubal; L. E. Hitchner; R. W. Rowe
Interface designs for three nuclear medicine imaging systems, and computer networking strategies proposed for medical imaging departments are presented. Configurations for two positron emission tomography devices (PET III and ECAT) and a general purpose tomography instrument (the UNICON) are analyzed in terms of specific performance parameters. Interface designs for these machines are contrasted in terms of utilization of standard versus custom modules, cost, and ease of modification, upgrade, and support. The requirements of general purpose systems for medical image analysis, display, and archiving, are considered, and a realizable state of the art system is specified, including a suggested timetable.