<scp>VMC</scp> versus BEAMnrc: A comparison of simulated linear accelerator heads for photon beams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BEAMnrc, a code for simulating medical linear accelerators based on EGSnrc, has been bench-marked and used extensively in the scientific literature and is therefore often considered to be the gold standard for Monte Carlo simulations for radiotherapy applications. However, its long computation times make it too slow for the clinical routine and often even for research purposes without a large investment in computing resources. VMC++ is a much faster code thanks to the intensive use of variance reduction techniques and a much faster implementation of the condensed history technique for charged particle transport. A research version of this code is also capable of simulating the full head of linear accelerators operated in photon mode (excluding multileaf collimators, hard and dynamic wedges). In this work, a validation of the full head simulation at 6 and 18 MV is performed, simulating with VMC++ and BEAMnrc the addition of one head component at a time and comparing the resulting phase space files. For the comparison, photon and electron fluence, photon energy fluence, mean energy, and photon spectra are considered. The largest absolute differences are found in the energy fluences. For all the simulations of the different head components, a very good agreement (differences in energy fluences between VMC++ and BEAMnrc <1%) is obtained. Only a particular case at 6 MV shows a somewhat larger energy fluence difference of 1.4%. Dosimetrically, these phase space differences imply an agreement between both codes at the <1% level, making VMC++ head module suitable for full head simulations with considerable gain in efficiency and without loss of accuracy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".