MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2076120727 · doi:10.1118/1.4736097

WE‐C‐BRB‐04: Fast and Accurate Hybrid Source Model for Modulated Electron Radiotherapy

2012· article· en· W2076120727 on OpenAlexaff
Pavlos Papaconstadopoulos, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodPhysicsComputational physicsCollimatorScatteringDosimetryElectronGaussianOpticsBeam (structure)Probability distributionMathematicsNuclear physicsStatisticsNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To develop a highly accurate and fast method for calculating electron beam dose distributions in Modulated Electron Radiation Therapy (MERT). Method: An algorithm has been developed for creating phase‐ space files at the exit of a linear accelerator for any arbitrary intensity and energy electron beam without the need of full Monte Carlo simulations. The model assigns each particle to one of the 3 following sources: primary, secondary collimator and electron collimator scatter. The primary component is derived by fast MC transport in air. The scatter components are derived by the use of MC pre‐calculated leaf kernels. Each kernel includes the fluence distribution, energy distribution and scatter probability of generating an electron from a leaf. The original position is sampled from Gaussian or uniform distributions. The direction is estimated by geometrical means. According to the projection of the direction, a particle is rejected if it is expected to suffer a leaf‐hit. A leaf‐hit counter is used to calculate the output of scatter particles based on the pre‐calculated scatter probabilities. To account for multiple coulomb scattering in air a MC‐corrected version of the Fermi‐Eyges scattering theory was implemented. Results: Depth and profile dose distributions were derived for the largest and smallest square field sizes, as well as for irregular and off‐axis fields. The model agreed with full MC dose distributions within 3% in all cases. Output at the depth of maximum dose exhibited discrepancies less than 2.6% in all cases. The model was 16–22 times faster in generating a phase‐space file than a full MC simulation with the BEAMnrc code. Conclusions: Fast, dynamic electron beam calculations open up the possibility for real time delivery of MERT in the clinic and renew interest in electron beam 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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→