Investigation of an efficient source design for Cobalt-60-based tomotherapy using EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent investigations demonstrate a strong potential for Cobalt-60 (Co-60)-based tomotherapy. Reported work suggests that Co-60-based tomotherapy offers a clinically and commercially viable alternative to megavoltage x-ray-based tomotherapy. Tomotherapy applications use a combination of intensity-modulated fan beams to deliver highly conformal radiotherapy. However, conventional Co-60 units are designed to give large uniform rectangular fields using an isotropic radioactive source in a cylindrical geometry. Such cylindrical source geometry likely provides a sub-optimal use of the radioactivity within the source volume for tomotherapy applications due to a significant loss of radiated energy outside the fan beam collimation system. To investigate a more efficient source geometry suitable for Co-60 tomotherapy applications, a computer code was written to model an isotropic source in a 6-faced polyhedron geometry such as cube, parallelepiped, prism and truncated pyramid. This code was integrated with the existing EGSnrc/BEAMnrc Monte Carlo (MC) code. The integrated source code was thoroughly tested, validated and used to investigate the energy spectra, radiation output and self-shielding properties of various rectangular-shaped (RS) Co-60 sources. Fan beam dose profiles were calculated for various cylindrical and RS Co-60 sources for a range of source-to-axis distances (SAD), multi-leaf collimator-to-isocentre distances (CID) and modified collimator systems. Fringe and penumbra distances were analysed for the simulated dose profiles. Our results demonstrate that clinically acceptable fringe and penumbra distances can be achieved by a careful selection of SAD, CID, source shape and dimensions and modified collimator system. Significant overall gain in radiation output of the 20 x 1 cm(2) fan beams can be achieved by an optimal selection of the source geometry for a given active volume of Co-60. The overall gain includes the effects of change in packing density (accounting for self-absorption) and change in source shape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".