MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810550331 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aacf7b

Investigating energy deposition within cell populations using Monte Carlo simulations

2018· article· en· W2810550331 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Oliver, Rowan M. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodPopulationPhysicsPhotonNucleusStandard deviationRADIUSComputational physicsIrradiationAtomic physicsMaterials scienceMolecular physicsNuclear physicsOpticsStatisticsBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this work, we develop multicellular models of healthy and cancerous human soft tissues, which are used to investigate energy deposition in subcellular targets, quantify the microdosimetric spread in a population of cells, and determine how these results depend on model details. Monte Carlo (MC) tissue models combining varying levels of detail on different length scales are developed: microscopically-detailed regions of interest (>1500 explicitly-modelled cells) are embedded in bulk tissue phantoms irradiated by photons (20 keV–1.25 MeV). Specific energy ( z ; energy imparted per unit mass) is scored in nuclei and cytoplasm compartments using the EGSnrc user-code egs_chamber; specific energy mean, , standard deviation, , and distribution, , are calculated for a variety of macroscopic doses, D . MC-calculated are compared with normal distributions having the same mean and standard deviation. For ∼mGy doses, there is considerable variation in energy deposition (microdosimetric spread) throughout a cell population: e.g. for 30 keV photons irradiating melanoma with 7.5 μ m cell radius and 3 μ m nuclear radius, for nuclear targets is , and the fraction of nuclei receiving no energy deposition, f z =0 , is 0.31 for a dose of 10 mGy. If cobalt-60 photons are considered instead, then decreases to , and f z =0 decreases to 0.036. These results correspond to randomly arranged cells with cell/nucleus sizes randomly sampled from a normal distribution with a standard deviation of 1 μ m. If cells are arranged in a hexagonal lattice and cell/nucleus sizes are uniform throughout the population, then decreases to and for 30 keV and cobalt-60, respectively; f z =0 decreases to 0.25 and 0.000 94 for 30 keV and cobalt-60, respectively. Thus, specific energy distributions are sensitive to cell/nucleus sizes and their distributions: variations in specific energy deposited over a cell population are underestimated if targets are assumed to be uniform in size compared with more realistic variation in target size. Bulk tissue dose differs from for nuclei (cytoplasms) by up to ( ) across all cell/nucleus sizes, bulk tissues, and incident photon energies, considering a 50 mGy dose level. Overall, results demonstrate the importance of microdosimetric considerations at low doses, and indicate the sensitivity of energy deposition within subcellular targets to incident photon energy, dose level, elemental compositions, and microscopic tissue 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207