Fast convolution‐superposition dose calculation on graphics hardware
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The numerical calculation of dose is central to treatment planning in radiation therapy and is at the core of optimization strategies for modern delivery techniques. In a clinical environment, dose calculation algorithms are required to be accurate and fast. The accuracy is typically achieved through the integration of patient-specific data and extensive beam modeling, which generally results in slower algorithms. In order to alleviate execution speed problems, the authors have implemented a modern dose calculation algorithm on a massively parallel hardware architecture. More specifically, they have implemented a convolution-superposition photon beam dose calculation algorithm on a commodity graphics processing unit (GPU). They have investigated a simple porting scenario as well as slightly more complex GPU optimization strategies. They have achieved speed improvement factors ranging from 10 to 20 times with GPU implementations compared to central processing unit (CPU) implementations, with higher values corresponding to larger kernel and calculation grid sizes. In all cases, they preserved the numerical accuracy of the GPU calculations with respect to the CPU calculations. These results show that streaming architectures such as GPUs can significantly accelerate dose calculation algorithms and let envision benefits for numerically intensive processes such as optimizing strategies, in particular, for complex delivery techniques such as IMRT and are therapy.
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".