MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013756609 · doi:10.1118/1.4853375

Evaluation of a new commercial Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for electron beams

2014· article· en· W2013756609 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Vandervoort, Ekaterina Tchistiakova, Daniel J. La Russa, Joanna Cygler

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationCarleton UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomMonte Carlo methodComputational physicsElectronDosimetryCathode rayHomogeneousRadiation treatment planningPhysicsNuclear medicineMaterials scienceOpticsMathematicsNuclear physicsStatistical physicsStatisticsMedicineRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In this report the authors present the validation of a Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm (XiO EMC from Elekta Software) for electron beams. METHODS: Calculated and measured dose distributions were compared for homogeneous water phantoms and for a 3D heterogeneous phantom meant to approximate the geometry of a trachea and spine. Comparisons of measurements and calculated data were performed using 2D and 3D gamma index dose comparison metrics. RESULTS: Measured outputs agree with calculated values within estimated uncertainties for standard and extended SSDs for open applicators, and for cutouts, with the exception of the 17 MeV electron beam at extended SSD for cutout sizes smaller than 5 × 5 cm(2). Good agreement was obtained between calculated and experimental depth dose curves and dose profiles (minimum number of measurements that pass a 2%/2 mm agreement 2D gamma index criteria for any applicator or energy was 97%). Dose calculations in a heterogeneous phantom agree with radiochromic film measurements (>98% of pixels pass a 3 dimensional 3%/2 mm γ-criteria) provided that the steep dose gradient in the depth direction is considered. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically acceptable agreement (at the 2%/2 mm level) between the measurements and calculated data for measurements in water are obtained for this dose calculation algorithm. Radiochromic film is a useful tool to evaluate the accuracy of electron MC treatment planning systems in heterogeneous media.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207