MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982808393 · doi:10.1118/1.2962078

SU‐GG‐T‐326: A Fast Monte Carlo Code for Proton Transport in Radiation Therapy Based On Pre‐Calculated Tracks From MCNPX

2008· article· en· W1982808393 on OpenAlexaff
Keyvan Jabbari, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodProtonPhysicsNeutronRange (aeronautics)Nuclear physicsElectronPhotonSecondary electronsComputational physicsMaterials scienceOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This work extends Pre‐calculated Monte Carlo (PMC), successfully developed for electrons to protons. PMC uses pre‐calculated tracks for each material in the simulation and applies these to heterogeneous geometries such as CT‐data. Method and Materials: The tracks of 10000 primary protons are generated in the middle of a large homogenous material for various energies using MCNPX. The proton range was 20, 40,…100, 110, …200 MeV with ECUT=200 keV. The ptrac routine of MCNPX writes the various events of each particle in a particular format. An in‐house Fortran code was developed to read and extract the position, direction, energy and deposited energy of a particle in each step from the ptrac file. Unlike electron and photons, protons produce many different secondary particles such as neutrons, deuterons, tritons, alphas, secondary protons, etc and they are handled in three categories: 1‐Secondary protons: treated like a primary protons and transported using a track picked up from pre‐calculated tracks; 2‐ Neutrons: The energy of the neutron are deposited far from the initial point and neglected. 3‐ All other secondaries: Since other secondaries have a very short range their energy is deposited locally. Results and Discussion: The size of the pre‐calculated data for each material is about 100 Mb. The performance of the code is evaluated in various homogeneous and in‐homogeneous phantoms. In comparison of the code with MCNPX as the reference the difference is generally between 2–5% and it runs 200 times faster than MCNPX. For electron transport the code runs 40–60 times faster than EGSnrc.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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