MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2005173181 · doi:10.1118/1.2241560

TU-D-224C-02: Monte Carlo Direct Aperture Optimization (MC-DAO) for IMRT

2006· article· en· W2005173181 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alanah Bergman, K Bush, Marie‐Pierre Milette, I A Popescu, Karl F. Otto, Cheryl Duzenli

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodPhysicsMedical physicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To improve the accuracy/efficiency of IMRT planning by combining Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation with direct aperture optimization (DAO). Method and Materials: A 6 MV beam arrangement is applied to an IMRT phantom and patient examples. A phase space is calculated below the secondary jaws of a virtual Varian 21EX linac by MC simulation (BEAMnrc code (NRC, Canada)). The phase space is subdivided into 2.5×5.0 mm2 beamlets and the dose distribution from each beamlet is calculated to organs‐of‐interest within the patient/phantom using DOSXYZnrc. This information is input into DAO inverse planning software. The DAO includes multileaf collimator transmission and leaf motion limitations as it modifies the shape/weight of the treatment apertures. The optimized leaf sequence requires no additional leaf motion calculation step. A final forward MC dose calculation is performed. The MC doses are verified with ion chamber and film measurement. MC‐DAO is applied to a difficult phantom geometry, namely a c‐shaped target with embedded organ‐at‐risk located directly adjacent to a 5.0cm‐thick air slab. Clinical sites include nasopharynx and lung.Results: The MC optimization allows for accurate modeling of the electronic disequilibrium introduced by the air cavities. For the phantom example, MC reveals that the plan optimized with a pencil beam (PB) algorithm fails to provide adequate coverage to the PTV close to the air cavity, whereas the MC‐DAO plan demonstrates adequate coverage. For the nasopharynx, the PB plan showed errors during ion chamber/film verification, probably due to the small (∼5×4 cm2) fields whereas the MC‐DAO plan showed good agreement. The reduction in monitor units for MC‐DAO plans is 20 – 40% compared to a commercial fluence‐based (PB) treatment planning system. Conclusion:MC simulation generates accurate input data for IMRT inverse treatment planning in difficult‐to‐calculate regions. The addition of DAO results in a more efficient treatment plan delivery.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→