Benchmarking of Monte Carlo simulation of bremsstrahlung from thick targets at radiotherapy energies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several Monte Carlo systems were benchmarked against published measurements of bremsstrahlung yield from thick targets for 10-30 MV beams. The quantity measured was photon fluence at 1 m per unit energy per incident electron (spectra), and total photon fluence, integrated over energy, per incident electron (photon yield). Results were reported at 10-30 MV on the beam axis for Al and Pb targets and at 15 MV at angles out to 90 degrees for Be, Al, and Pb targets. Beam energy was revised with improved accuracy of 0.5% using an improved energy calibration of the accelerator. Recently released versions of the Monte Carlo systems EGSNRC, GEANT4, and PENELOPE were benchmarked against the published measurements using the revised beam energies. Monte Carlo simulation was capable of calculation of photon yield in the experimental geometry to 5% out to 30 degrees, 10% at wider angles, and photon spectra to 10% at intermediate photon energies, 15% at lower energies. Accuracy of measured photon yield from 0 to 30 degrees was 5%, 1 s.d., increasing to 7% for the larger angles. EGSNRC and PENELOPE results were within 2 s.d. of the measured photon yield at all beam energies and angles, GEANT4 within 3 s.d. Photon yield at nonzero angles for angles covering conventional field sizes used in radiotherapy (out to 10 degrees), measured with an accuracy of 3%, was calculated within 1 s.d. of measurement for EGSNRC, 2 s.d. for PENELOPE and GEANT4. Calculated spectra closely matched measurement at photon energies over 5 MeV. Photon spectra near 5 MeV were underestimated by as much as 10% by all three codes. The photon spectra below 2-3 MeV for the Be and Al targets and small angles were overestimated by up to 15% when using EGSNRC and PENELOPE, 20% with GEANT4. EGSNRC results with the NIST option for the bremsstrahlung cross section were preferred over the alternative cross section available in EGSNRC and over EGS4. GEANT4 results calculated with the "low energy" physics list were more accurate than those calculated with the "standard" physics list.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".