A convolution‐superposition dose calculation engine for GPUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Graphic processing units (GPUs) are increasingly used for scientific applications, where their parallel architecture and unprecedented computing power density can be exploited to accelerate calculations. In this paper, a new GPU implementation of a convolution/superposition (CS) algorithm is presented. METHODS: This new GPU implementation has been designed from the ground-up to use the graphics card's strengths and to avoid its weaknesses. The CS GPU algorithm takes into account beam hardening, off-axis softening, kernel tilting, and relies heavily on raytracing through patient imaging data. Implementation details are reported as well as a multi-GPU solution. RESULTS: An overall single-GPU acceleration factor of 908x was achieved when compared to a nonoptimized version of the CS algorithm implemented in PlanUNC in single threaded central processing unit (CPU) mode, resulting in approximatively 2.8 s per beam for a 3D dose computation on a 0.4 cm grid. A comparison to an established commercial system leads to an acceleration factor of approximately 29x or 0.58 versus 16.6 s per beam in single threaded mode. An acceleration factor of 46x has been obtained for the total energy released per mass (TERMA) calculation and a 943x acceleration factor for the CS calculation compared to PlanUNC. Dose distributions also have been obtained for a simple water-lung phantom to verify that the implementation gives accurate results. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that GPUs are an attractive solution for radiation therapy applications and that careful design, taking the GPU architecture into account, is critical in obtaining significant acceleration factors. These results potentially can have a significant impact on complex dose delivery techniques requiring intensive dose calculations such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and arc therapy. They also are relevant for adaptive radiation therapy where dose results must be obtained rapidly.
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".