MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2463607152 · doi:10.1118/1.4957399

TU-AB-BRC-05: Creation of a Monte Carlo TrueBeam Model by Reproducing Varian Phase Space Data

2016· article· en· W2463607152 on OpenAlexaff
Kyle O’Grady, Stephen Davis, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruebeamMonte Carlo methodFluencePhysicsParameter spaceNuclear medicineComputational physicsOpticsStatisticsMathematicsLinear particle acceleratorMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To create a Varian TrueBeam 6 MV FFF Monte Carlo model using BEAMnrc/EGSnrc that accurately reproduces the Varian representative dataset, followed by tuning the model's source parameters to accurately reproduce in-house measurements. Methods: A BEAMnrc TrueBeam model for 6 MV FFF has been created by modifying a validated 6 MV Varian CL21EX model. Geometric dimensions and materials were adjusted in a trial and error approach to match the fluence and spectra of TrueBeam phase spaces output by the Varian VirtuaLinac. Once the model's phase space matched Varian's counterpart using the default source parameters, it was validated to match 10 × 10 cm2 Varian representative data obtained with the IBA CC13. The source parameters were then tuned to match in-house 5 × 5 cm2 PTW microDiamond measurements. All dose to water simulations included detector models to include the effects of volume averaging and the non-water equivalence of the chamber materials, allowing for more accurate source parameter selection. Results: The Varian phase space spectra and fluence were matched with excellent agreement. The in-house model's PDD agreement with CC13 TrueBeam representative data was within 0.9% local percent difference beyond the first 3 mm. Profile agreement at 10 cm depth was within 0.9% local percent difference and 1.3 mm distance-to-agreement in the central axis and penumbra regions, respectively. Once the source parameters were tuned, PDD agreement with microDiamond measurements was within 0.9% local percent difference beyond 2 mm. The microDiamond profile agreement at 10 cm depth was within 0.6% local percent difference and 0.4 mm distance-to-agreement in the central axis and penumbra regions, respectively. Conclusion: An accurate in-house Monte Carlo model of the Varian TrueBeam was achieved independently of the Varian phase space solution and was tuned to in-house measurements. KO acknowledges partial support by the CREATE Medical Physics Research Training Network grant of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (Grant number: 432290).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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