Monte Carlo modelling of external radiotherapy photon beams
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An essential requirement for successful radiation therapy is that the discrepancies between dose distributions calculated at the treatment planning stage and those delivered to the patient are minimized. An important component in the treatment planning process is the accurate calculation of dose distributions. The most accurate way to do this is by Monte Carlo calculation of particle transport, first in the geometry of the external or internal source followed by tracking the transport and energy deposition in the tissues of interest. Additionally, Monte Carlo simulations allow one to investigate the influence of source components on beams of a particular type and their contaminant particles. Since the mid 1990s, there has been an enormous increase in Monte Carlo studies dealing specifically with the subject of the present review, i.e., external photon beam Monte Carlo calculations, aided by the advent of new codes and fast computers. The foundations for this work were laid from the late 1970s until the early 1990s. In this paper we will review the progress made in this field over the last 25 years. The review will be focused mainly on Monte Carlo modelling of linear accelerator treatment heads but sections will also be devoted to kilovoltage x-ray units and 60Co teletherapy sources.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it