Factors influencing the accuracy of beam range estimation in proton therapy using prompt gamma emission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In-vivo imaging is a strategy to monitor the range of protons inside the patient during radiation treatment. A possible method of in-vivo imaging is detection of secondary 'prompt' gamma (PG) photons outside the body, which are produced by inelastic proton-nuclear interactions inside the patient. In this paper, important parameters influencing the relationship between the PG profile and percentage depth dose (PDD) in a uniform cylindrical phantom are explored. Monte Carlo simulations are performed with the new Geant4 based code TOPAS for mono-energetic proton pencil beams (range: 100-250 MeV) and an idealized PG detector. PG depth profiles are evaluated using the inflection point on a sigmoid fit in the fall-off region of the profile. A strong correlation between the inflection point and the proton range determined from the PDD is found for all conditions. Variations between 1.5 mm and 2.7 mm in the distance between the proton range and the inflection point are found when either the mass density, phantom diameter, or detector acceptance angle is changed. A change in cut-off energy of the detector could induce a range difference of maximum 4 mm. Applying time-of-flight discrimination during detection, changing the primary energy of the beam or changing the elemental composition of the tissue affects the accuracy of the range prediction by less than 1 mm. The results indicate that the PG signal is rather robust to many parameter variations, but millimetre accurate range monitoring requires all medium and detector properties to be carefully taken into account.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".