MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893174821 · doi:10.4103/jmp.jmp_132_17

Optimization of variance reduction techniques used in EGSnrc Monte Carlo Codes

2018· article· en· W2893174821 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariance reductionMonte Carlo methodPhotonImaging phantomComputationPhysicsComputational physicsReduction (mathematics)ElectronIonization chamberIonComputer scienceAlgorithmNuclear physicsMathematicsOpticsStatisticsIonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are often used in calculations of radiation transport to enable accurate prediction of radiation-dose, even though the computation is relatively time-consuming. In a typical MC simulation, significant computation time is allocated to following non-important events. To address this issue, variance reduction techniques (VRTs) have been suggested for reducing the statistical variance for the same computation time. Among the available MC simulation codes, electron gamma shower (National Research Council of Canada) (EGSnrc) is a general-purpose coupled electron-photon transport code that also features an even-handed, rich set of VRTs. The most well-known VRTs are the photon splitting, Russian roulette (RR), and photon cross-section enhancement (XCSE) techniques. The objective of this work was to determine the optimal combination of VRTs that increases the simulation speed and the efficiency of simulation, without compromising its accuracy. Selection of VRTs was performed using EGSnrc MC User codes, such as cavity and egs_chamber, for simulating various ion chamber geometries using 6 MV photon beams and 1.25 MeV<sup>60</sup>Co photon beams. The results show that the combination of XCSE and RR yields the highest efficiency for ion-chamber dose calculations inside a 30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm water phantom. Hence, properly selecting a different VRT without altering the underlying physics increases the efficiency of MC simulations for ion-chamber dose calculation.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.297 · 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