A. Khallouqi et al.: Radioprotection 2025, 60( 3), 268 – 276 273
Fig. 7. Comparison of D w and D eff diameters as function of d LAT.
Fig. 8. Comparison of D w and D eff diameters as function of d AP.
determination were calculated as 0.9175 for D eff and 0.7578 for D W, indicating a strong relationship between d LAT and D eff. Linear trend lines fitted to the data resulted in equations of y = 0.7003x þ 3.8434 for D eff and y = 0.7044x þ 2.0385 for D W. Generally, D eff values were found to be greater than D W, primarily due to a higher y-intercept, while the slopes remained very similar. This consistent difference suggests a systematic overestimation of D eff compared to the mid-height diameter, which could be attributed to differences in measurement methods or intrinsic characteristics of the measured objects. The high correlations between d LAT and both diameter measurements indicate good linear relationships, with D eff potentially being a more precise indicator of overall object size due to its stronger correlation with d LAT.
Figure 8 illustrates the relationship between D W and D eff as a function of d AP. The scatter plot presents a high positive correlation between both diameter measurements and d AP, with