MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922483423 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab0db5

<tt>pGPUMCD</tt>: an efficient GPU-based Monte Carlo code for accurate proton dose calculations

2019· article· en· W2922483423 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel C. Maneval, Benoı̂t Ozell, Philippe Després

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodProton therapyVoxelFormalism (music)Variance reductionProtonPhysicsComputationBragg peakScatteringComputer scienceComputational physicsStatistical physicsAlgorithmMathematicsNuclear physicsArtificial intelligenceOpticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In proton therapy, Monte Carlo simulations are desirable to accurately predict the delivered dose. This paper introduces and benchmarks pGPUMCD , a GPU-based Monte Carlo code implementing the physical processes required for proton therapy applications. In pGPUMCD , the proton transport is carried out in a voxelized geometry with a class II condensed history scheme. For this purpose, the equivalent restricted stopping power formalism ( L eq formalism), the Fermi–Eyges scattering theory and the discrete electromagnetic/nuclear interactions were considered. pGPUMCD was compared to Geant4 in a validation study where the physical processes were validated one after the other. Dose differences between pGPUMCD and Geant4 were smaller than 1% in the Bragg peak region and up to 3% in its distal fall-off. Moreover, a voxelwise dose difference below 1% was observed for 99.5% of calculation positions. The pGPUMCD 80% falloff positions matched with those of Geant4 within 0.1%. The pGPUMCD computation times were inversely proportional to the voxel size, with one million protons transported in less than 0.5 s with mm 3 voxels. pGPUMCD , based on the L eq formalism variance reduction technique, is therefore an attractive candidate for integration in a clinical treatment planning system.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.009

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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