Monte Carlo calculation of monitor unit for electron arc therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Monitor unit (MU) calculations for electron are therapy were carried out using Monte Carlo simulations and verified by measurements. Variations in the dwell factor (DF), source-to-surface distance (SSD), and treatment are angle (a) were studied. Moreover, the possibility of measuring the DF, which requires gantry rotation, using a solid water rectangular, instead of cylindrical, phantom was investigated. METHODS: A phase space file based on the 9 MeV electron beam with rectangular cutout (physical size = 2.6 x 21 cm2) attached to the block tray holder of a Varian 21 EX linear accelerator (linac) was generated using the EGSnrc-based Monte Carlo code and verified by measurement. The relative output factor (ROF), SSD offset, and DF, needed in the MU calculation, were determined using measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. An ionization chamber, a radiographic film, a solid water rectangular phantom, and a cylindrical phantom made of polystyrene were used in dosimetry measurements. RESULTS: Percentage deviations of ROF, SSD offset, and DF between measured and Monte Carlo results were 1.2%, 0.18%, and 1.5%, respectively. It was found that the DF decreased with an increase in a, and such a decrease in DF was more significant in the a range of 0 degrees-60 degrees than 60 degrees-120 degrees. Moreover, for a fixed a, the DF increased with an increase in SSD. Comparing the DF determined using the rectangular and cylindrical phantom through measurements and Monte Carlo simulations, it was found that the DF determined by the rectangular phantom agreed well with that by the cylindrical one within +/- 1.2%. It shows that a simple setup of a solid water rectangular phantom was sufficient to replace the cylindrical phantom using our specific cutout to determine the DF associated with the electron arc. CONCLUSIONS: By verifying using dosimetry measurements, Monte Carlo simulations proved to be an alternative way to perform MU calculations effectively for electron are therapy. Since Monte Carlo simulations can generate a precalculated database of ROF, SSD offset, and DF for the MU calculation, with a reduction in human effort and linac beam-on time, it is recommended that Monte Carlo simulations be partially or completely integrated into the commissioning of electron are therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".