A Hamiltonian Engine for Radiotherapy Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We apply a new hardware and software platform called the Hamiltonian Engine for Radiotherapy Optimization (HERO) to the problem of Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. HERO solves large general-form binary optimization problems by decomposing them into sub-problems and approximating them using a quadratic pseudo-boolean function. Optimizing the resulting function becomes a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) problem, which has been widely studied and has numerous applications in various fields. A Quantum Annealer (QA) approach has been previously investigated to solve QUBO problems, including IMRT optimization. However, the QA can only accommodate a small number of variables and requires several hours to obtain optimized plans. HERO acts as an optimizer for QUBO problems, which not only addresses these shortcomings but also relies solely on conventional hardware design while operating at room temperature. We evaluate HERO on seven prostate IMRT cases with clinical objectives, each using approximately 6000 beamlets. Our method was compared to the commercial treatment planning software, Eclipse, for both time-to-solution and plan quality. HERO solves most cases in about 30 seconds, with significantly lower objective function scores than Eclipse. The results indicate that HERO is promising for radiation therapy optimization problems. Additionally, HERO has the potential to be applied to Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and other complex types of treatment planning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".