MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975801175 · doi:10.1118/1.4894921

Poster - Thur Eve - 61: A new framework for MPERT plan optimization using MC-DAO

2014· article· en· W1975801175 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Baker, K Bush, Samantha A. M. Lloyd, R Townson, Isabelle Gagne, Sergei Zavgorodni

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodComputer sciencePhotonPhysicsAperture (computer memory)Medical physicsOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work combines the inverse planning technique known as Direct Aperture Optimization (DAO) with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) and combined electron and photon therapy plans. In particular, determining conditions under which Modulated Photon/Electron Radiation Therapy (MPERT) produces better dose conformality and sparing of organs at risk than traditional IMRT plans is central to the project. Presented here are the materials and methods used to generate and manipulate the DAO procedure. Included is the introduction of a powerful Java-based toolkit, the Aperture-based Monte Carlo (MC) MPERT Optimizer (AMMO), that serves as a framework for optimization and provides streamlined access to underlying particle transport packages. Comparison of the toolkit's dose calculations to those produced by the Eclipse TPS and the demonstration of a preliminary optimization are presented as first benchmarks. Excellent agreement is illustrated between the Eclipse TPS and AMMO for a 6MV photon field. The results of a simple optimization shows the functioning of the optimization framework, while significant research remains to characterize appropriate constraints.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207