MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142723533 · doi:10.1117/1.3080134

Hardware acceleration of a Monte Carlo simulation for photodynamic treatment planning

2009· article· en· W2142723533 on OpenAlexafffund
William Chun Yip Lo, Keith Redmond, Jason Luu, Paul Chow, Jonathan Rose, Lothar Lilge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodAccelerationComputer sciencePhotodynamic therapyMedical physicsOpticsPhysicsChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are being used extensively in the field of medical biophysics, particularly for modeling light propagation in tissues. The high computation time for MC limits its use to solving only the forward solutions for a given source geometry, emission profile, and optical interaction coefficients of the tissue. However, applications such as photodynamic therapy treatment planning or image reconstruction in diffuse optical tomography require solving the inverse problem given a desired dose distribution or absorber distribution, respectively. A faster means for performing MC simulations would enable the use of MC-based models for accomplishing such tasks. To explore this possibility, a digital hardware implementation of a MC simulation based on the Monte Carlo for Multi-Layered media (MCML) software was implemented on a development platform with multiple field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). The hardware performed the MC simulation on average 80 times faster and was 45 times more energy efficient than the MCML software executed on a 3-GHz Intel Xeon processor. The resulting isofluence lines closely matched those produced by MCML in software, diverging by only less than 0.1 mm for fluence levels as low as 0.00001 cm(-2) in a skin model.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.327 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207