MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2017992247 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/24/7919

A hybrid phase-space and histogram source model for GPU-based Monte Carlo radiotherapy dose calculation

2014· article· en· W2017992247 on OpenAlexaff
R Townson, Sergei Zavgorodni

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaBC Cancer Agency
FundersChongqing University
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodTruebeamPhotonHistogramComputer sciencePhase spacePhysicsOpticsAlgorithmMathematicsLinear particle acceleratorStatisticsBeam (structure)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In GPU-based Monte Carlo simulations for radiotherapy dose calculation, source modelling from a phase-space source can be an efficiency bottleneck. Previously, this has been addressed using phase-space-let (PSL) sources, which provided significant efficiency enhancement. We propose that additional speed-up can be achieved through the use of a hybrid primary photon point source model combined with a secondary PSL source. A novel phase-space derived and histogram-based implementation of this model has been integrated into gDPM v3.0. Additionally, a simple method for approximately deriving target photon source characteristics from a phase-space that does not contain inheritable particle history variables (LATCH) has been demonstrated to succeed in selecting over 99% of the true target photons with only ~0.3% contamination (for a Varian 21EX 18 MV machine). The hybrid source model was tested using an array of open fields for various Varian 21EX and TrueBeam energies, and all cases achieved greater than 97% chi-test agreement (the mean was 99%) above the 2% isodose with 1% / 1 mm criteria. The root mean square deviations (RMSDs) were less than 1%, with a mean of 0.5%, and the source generation time was 4-5 times faster. A seven-field intensity modulated radiation therapy patient treatment achieved 95% chi-test agreement above the 10% isodose with 1% / 1 mm criteria, 99.8% for 2% / 2 mm, a RMSD of 0.8%, and source generation speed-up factor of 2.5.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→