## 2 Materials and Methods
### Characterization of TLD Micro-Cubes  
#### 2.3.1 Homogeneity and Reproducibility  
The response homogeneity and the sensitivity factors of 200 dosimeters were studied in a previous work [24]. In the previous work, the batch was placed in an acrylic holder with 10 cm of acrylic and solid water on and below the sample holder, respectively. An EBT3 radiochromic film was placed between the support and the acrylic thickness to verify that the TLDs had been irradiated at the same dose. The dosimeters were irradiated four times at a dose in the water of 1 Gy, whereby data from the first three irradiations were used to obtain the sensitivity factor (Equation (1)), while those from the fourth were used to evaluate the effect of its application. The sensitivity factor was defined as [24,25]:  
\[f_{i}=\frac{TLR_{\textit{average}}}{TLR_{i}} \tag{1}\]  
where \(TLR_{\textit{average}}\) and \(TLR_{i}\) are the average and individual dosimeter thermoluminescent response (\(TLR\)), respectively. The TLD response homogeneity of the dosimeters used in this work, before and after correcting for sensitivity, demonstrated a standard deviation of 5.9% and 1.3%, respectively [24]. The average and standard deviation of the individual \(TLR\) were obtained to determine the reproducibility of each dosimeter. It was shown that the \(TLR\)s presented a standard deviation of 10%. However, after reading the dosimeters by placing the same face of the TLD on the heater pan, the standard deviation of the \(TLR\) decreased to 3%. Therefore, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Authors**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Dosimeter**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Conditions**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Difference between**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Field Sizes (cm \(\times\) cm)** & **Geometry (cm)** & **Depth (cm)** & **Dose (Gy)** & **Measure and** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[PERSON] et al. [20]} & TLD-100 (l \(\times 1\times 1\) mm\({}^{3}\)) & \multirow{2}{*}{SAD, 100} & \multirow{2}{*}{5, 10} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.5} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} 1 \(\times\) cm\({}^{2}\) field: lower than 5% in 69\% of the studied institutions. \\ 5\% in 64\% of the \\ studied institutions. \\ than 2.9 \%. \\ \end{tabular} } \\  & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[PERSON] et al. [21]} & Kodak EDR film and alanine dosimeters & Intensity modulated fileds. & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} 1 \(\times\) 1 cm\({}^{2}\) field: lower than 5% in 69\% of the studied institutions. \\ 5\% in 64\% of the studied institutions. \\ found await lower than 2.9 \%. \\ \end{tabular} } \\  & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[PERSON] et al. [22]} & Ionization chamber (BA Scandironik Wellhofer FC65-P) & \multirow{2}{*}{10 \(\times\) 10} & \multirow{2}{*}{SAD} & \multirow{2}{*}{5, 10} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \begin{tabular}{c} \(\times\)6-0 units: 61\% greater than \(\pm\)3\% and 31\% than \(\pm\)5\% \\ Linae: 24\% greater than \(\pm\)3\% and 7\% \\ than \(\pm\)3\% \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[PERSON] et al. [23]} & Ionization chamber & 10 \(\times\) 10 & SSD 80, 100 & 5, 10 & 1 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Some differences in a range of 18 to 22\%, the rest lower than 3\%. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{This work} & TLD-100 (l \(\times\) 1 x 1 mm\({}^{3}\)) & Calibration fields: & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 10 \(\times\) 10, & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & TLD-100 (l \(\times\) 1 x 1 mm\({}^{3}\)) & \multirow{2}{*}{SSD 95} & \multirow{2}{*}{5} & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} Presented in the results section. \\ results section. \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{1-1}  & EBT3 radiochromic film & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Conditions under which dose measurement was carried out and the reported percentage differences between the measured and prescribed doses.