Evaluation of optimization strategies and the effect of initial conditions on IMAT optimization using a leaf position optimization algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) is a rotational variant of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) that can be implemented with or without angular dose rate variation. The purpose of this study is to assess optimization strategies and initial conditions using a leaf position optimization (LPO) algorithm altered for variable dose rate IMAT. A concave planning target volume (PTV) with a central cylindrical organ at risk (OAR) was used in this study. The initial IMAT arcs were approximated by multiple static beams at 5 degrees angular increments where multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf positions were determined from the beam's eye view to irradiate the PTV but avoid the OAR. For the optimization strategy, two arcs with arc ranges of 280 degrees and 150 degrees were employed and plans were created using LPO alone, variable dose rate optimization (VDRO) alone, simultaneous LPO and VDRO and sequential combinations of these strategies. To assess the MLC initialization effect, three single 360 degrees arc plans with different initial MLC configurations were generated using the simultaneous LPO and VDRO. The effect of changing optimization degrees of freedom was investigated by employing 3 degrees , 5 degrees and 10 degrees angular sampling intervals for the two 280 degrees , two 150 degrees and single arc plans using LPO and VDRO. The objective function value, a conformity index, a dose homogeneity index, mean dose to OAR and normal tissues were computed and used to evaluate the treatment plans. This study shows that the best optimization strategy for a concave target is to use simultaneous MLC LPO and VDRO. We found that the optimization result is sensitive to the choice of initial MLC aperture shapes suggesting that an LPO-based IMAT plan may not be able to overcome local minima for this geometry. In conclusion, simultaneous MLC leaf position and VDRO are needed with the most appropriate initial conditions (MLC positions, arc ranges and number of arcs) for IMAT.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".